Screw the UN

Simon Deng - The United Nations: Accessory to Slavery and other Crimes

2011-10-19T12:02:00.000-07:00

Simon Deng tells it like it is.

With thanks to Hudson New York

Like you, I came to this conference, The Perils of Global Intolerance to protest this third Durban conference which is an effort based on a set of lies, and organized by nations who are themselves are guilty of the worst kinds of oppression.

Durban III will not help the victims of racism. It will only isolate and target the Jewish state. It is a tool of the enemies of Israel. The UN has lost its way. Its obsession with the Jewish obvious: . For over 50 years, 82% of the UN General Assembly emergency meetings have been about condemning one state - Israel. Hitler could not have been made happier.

Given all the good Israel does in the world, given its democracy and its striving to follow the highest standards of human rights, even in the face of the most brutal, the most fanatic enemies, the Durban Conference is an outrage. All decent people know that.

But friends, I come here today to make a different case. I come with what you might at first think is a radical proposition: I come to tell you that there are peoples who suffer from the UN's anti-Israelism even more than the Israelis. I belong to one of those people.

By exaggerating Palestinian suffering, and by blaming the Jews for it, the UN has muffled the cries of those who suffer on a far larger scale.

For over fifty years the indigenous black African population of Sudan -- Christians and Muslims alike --- have been the victims of the brutal, racist Arab Muslim regimes in Khartoum.

In South Sudan, my homeland, Sudan, about four million innocent men, women and children were slaughtered from 1955 to 2005. Seven million were ethnically cleansed, and they became the largest refugee group since World War II.

Everybody at the United Nations is concerned about the so-called Palestinian refugees. They dedicated a separate agency to provide for them; this agency, UNWRA, treats them with a special privilege.

Meanwhile, my people, ethnically cleansed, murdered and enslaved, are relatively ignored. The UN even resisted using the word "slavery" to describe the enslavement of tens of thousands of my people. Why? Because slavery is a crime against humanity, apparently no one committing it wanted to end up before an international court. When Khartoum insisted that the term "abducted people" be substituted for the word "slaves," the UN, caved to Arab pressure and agreed. Try that in America. Try calling Frederick Douglas an "abducted person." It is outrageous.

The UN refuses to tell the world the truth about the root causes of Sudan's conflicts. Take Darfur, for example. Who knows really what is happening in Darfur? It is not a "tribal conflict." It is a conflict rooted in Arab colonialism, as it has typically been practiced in Africa. In Darfur, a region in the Western Sudan everybody is Muslim. Everybody is Muslim because the Arabs invaded the North of Africa and converted the indigenous people to Islam In the eyes of the Islamists in Khartoum, the Darfuris are not Muslim enough. And they also do not want to be Arabized. They like their own African languages and dress and customs. They resist Arabization. The Arab response is genocide. But nobody tells the truth about Darfur.

In the Nuba Mountains, another region of Sudan, genocide is taking place as I speak. The regime is targeting the black Africans -- Muslims and Christians. This happened to the Nuba people before. In the 1990's hundreds of thousands were murdered; a large number of women were raped; children were abducted and forcibly converted to Islam. Nobody at the UN told the truth about the Nuba Mountains.

Do you see a massive amount of outrage and reports and protests about this coming out of the UN or Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International? Do you hear them condemn Arab anti-black racism?

Look at the pages of the New York Times, or the record of the UN condemnations, What you will find is "Israeli crimes" and Palestinian suffering. My people have been driven off the front pages by the exaggerations of Palestinian suffering. Why? Because what Israel does is portrayed as a Western sin that we are all supposed to address.

The truth is that the West commits a real sin when it abandons us: the actual victims of non-Westerns. Our suffering has become almost taboo.

Let me return to the topic of slavery: while there are issues that divide public opinion, we can all agree that for one man to own another is a sin, and it should be stopped. The Americans tore themselves apart over the issue of slavery.

Chattel slavery, a centuries-long practice in Sudan, was revived as a tool of war in the early '90s. The Islamist regime in Khartoum declared jihad, or holy war, and thereby legitimized taking slaves as war booty. Arab militias were sent to destroy Southern villages and were encouraged to take African women and children as slaves. We believe that up to 200,000 were kidnapped, brought to the North and sold into slavery.

I am a living proof of this crime against humanity.

I do not like talking about my experience as a slave, but I do it because it is important for the world to know that slavery exists even today.

I was only nine years old when I was made a slave. An Arab neighbor named Abdullahi tricked me into following him to a boat destined to Northern Sudan where he gave me as a gift to his family. For three and a half years I was their slave going through something that no child should ever go through: brutal beatings and humiliations; working around the clock; sleeping on the ground with animals; eating the family's left-overs. During those three years I was unable to say the word "no." All I could say was "yes," "yes," "yes."

The United Nations knew about the brutal enslavement of South Sudanese by the Arabs from the early days of the conflict. Human Right Watch issued extensive reports about the issue. These reports gathered dust on UN shelves. It took UNICEF – under pressure from the Jewish –led American Anti-Slavery Group -- sixteen years to acknowledge what was happening.

As soon as the Sudanese government and the Arab League pressured UNICEF, the UN agency backtracked, and proceeded to criticize the Non-Governmental Organizations that worked to liberate Sudanese slaves. In 1998, Dr. Gaspar Biro, the courageous UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Sudan who reported on slavery, resigned in protest of the UN's actions.

My friends, today, tens of thousands of black South Sudanese still serve their masters in the North and the UN is silent about that. It would offend the OIC and the Arab League. So much for "human rights for everybody".

As a former slave and a victim of the worst sort of racism, allow me to explain why I think calling Israel a racist state is absolutely absurd and immoral.

I have been to Israel five times visiting the Sudanese refugees. Let me tell you how they ended up there. These are Sudanese who fled Arab racism, hoping to find shelter in Egypt. They were wrong. In 2005, the refugees camped outside the offices of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees in Cairo looking for mercy. Instead, the United Nations closed its doors and left the helpless women and children at the mercy of the ruthless Egyptian security forces who brutally slaughtered at least 26 of them.

After this event the Sudanese realized that Arab racism is the same, whether it is in Khartoum or in Cairo. So they continued looking for a shelter and they found it in Israel. Dodging the bullets of the Egyptian border patrols and walking for punishingly long distances, the refugees' only hope was to reach Israel's side of the fence, where they knew they would be safe.

The fact that even Darfuris, who are Muslims, chose Israel above all the other Arab-Muslim states of the area, speaks volumes.. Israel is racist? Israel is against the Muslim world? Ask the thousands of black Muslim Darfuris who found shelter inside the Jewish state.

When I asked the refugees about the treatment they receive in Israel, their response is absolutely the opposite of what the United Nations alleges. They were welcomed and treated like human beings. Compared to the situation in Egypt, they described their lives in Israel as "heaven." No-one called them "abid" – an Arabic word for slaves often used in Sudan, Egypt and other Arab nations.

Is Israel a racist state? To my people, the people who know racism – the answer is absolutely not. It is a state of people of the colors of the rainbow. Jews themselves come in all colors, even black. I met with beautiful black Ethiopian Jews in Israel. Israel is a state that has taken my own black people in, rescued them, and helped them.

So, yes … my claim may be a radical claim: I claim that the victims who suffer most from the UN's anti-Israel policy are not just the Israelis but all those people who have to be ignored in order for the UN to tell its big lie against Israel: all those victims of non Western abuse, especially all those victims of Arab and Muslim abuse: women, ethnic minorities, religious minorities, homosexuals, in the Arab and Muslim world. These are the biggest victims of UN Israel hatred.

So far, the Israelis have only been cursed by the UN. But look at the situation of the Copts, the Christians in Iraq, and Nigeria, and Iran, the Hindus and Bahais and Sikhs who suffer from Islamic oppression. We all suffer. We are ignored, we are abandoned so that the big lie against the Jews can go forward.

Before I conclude let me tell you a story that reflects a special connection that the people of South Sudan feel toward Israel. In 2005, I visited one of the refugee camps in South Sudan. I met a twelve year old girl who told me about her dream. In a dream she wanted to go to school to become a doctor, and then, she wanted to visit Israel. I was shocked and numb. How could this refugee girl who spent most of her life in the North know about Israel? When I asked why she wanted to visit Israel, she said: "This is our people." I was never able to find an answer to my question.

On July 9 of 2011 South Sudan became an independent state. We achieved freedom despite the opposition from the Arab world and despite the United Nations, whose General Secretary, Bi Ki Moon, lobbied for the unity of Sudan. For the South Sudanese, that would mean continuation of oppression, brutalization, demonization, Islamization, Arabization and enslavement.

In a similar manner, the Arabs continue denying Jews their right for sovereignty in their homeland; and the Durban III conference continues denying Israel's legitimacy.

As a friend of Israel, I salute the President of the Republic of South Sudan, Salva Kiir, who had the courage to state publicly that South Sudan embassy in Israel will be built--- not in Tel Aviv, but in Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Jewish people.

I also want to assure you that my own new nation, and all of its people, will oppose racist forums like the Durban III. We will oppose it by simply telling the truth.

This originally appeared in a a slightly different form as an address at a conference titled "The Perils of Global Intolerance", in New York City, September 22, 2011.

Learn more about the new nation of South Sudan at Pickle92's Blog.

Phyllis Chesler: America - The Chief Subsidizer of UN Rapists and Traffickers

2011-09-21T09:09:00.000-07:00

Pajamas Media has the story.

The Wilsonian ideals of the UN are not realizable. In turn, the UN is built on a lie: that its diplomats are morally decent.

Well, of course...

2011-06-29T13:10:00.000-07:00

North Korea assumes presidency of UN arms control conference
(h/t: Gulfloafer)

In the latest ‘you’ve got to be kidding’ news from the United Nations, North Korea assumed the presidency of the Conference on Disarmament Tuesday.

“Bare months after the U.N. finally suspended Libya’s Col. Muammar Qaddafi from its Human Rights Council, North Korea wins the propaganda coup of heading the world’s disarmament agency,” the executive director of UN Watch Hillel Neuer said in a statement protesting the move. “It’s asking the fox to guard the chickens, and damages the U.N.’s credibility.”

According to the U.N. summary of the meeting, North Korea’s So Se Pyong addressed the 65-member arms control forum, saying that “he was very much committed to the Conference and during his presidency he welcomed any sort of constructive proposals that strengthened the work and credibility of the body.”

Neuer said that though North Korea’s new role as head of the conference, which reports to the U.N. General Assembly, would likely be justified by the U.N. by saying it was the result of a an “automatic rotation,” such an excuse was not sufficient...

Shaking my head...

Who is more corrupt - the Nobel Committee or the UN?

2011-04-19T19:52:00.000-07:00

The Nobel Committee Ignored a Genuine Heroine to Promote a Climate Scammer

By Gramfan

YouTube - Irena Sendler - Sleeping With The Angels - Irena Sendler Symphony

The clip above is self-explanatory (click link to view).

A film was made about her, starring Anna Paquin.

In 2007 Irena Sendler was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for saving around 2,500 children from the certain death of being taken from the Warsaw Ghetto to Treblinka.

It remains unclear why the Nobel Committee took so long to recognize her achievement with a nomination. One can only speculate on their agenda.

Suffice it to say Al Gore and the IPCC won the Peace Prize that year.

If you ever had any doubts that the Nobel Committee is totally beyond contempt I hope these doubts are now dispelled.

It is worthwhile to refresh the memory, or possibly inform people who may not know of Irena Sendler.

The way thinks are looking now regarding Jews, no only in Europe again, but everywhere, it is up to the good and righteous to make sure that another Jewish Holocaust never happens again.

In fact it is up to the good and righteous to make sure NO genocide ever occurs again.

The United Nations is not going to stop any further attempts at genocide, even though they "appear to care", and have the "Responsibility to Protect Doctrine".

The UN proved this in Rwanda. They pulled out their “peace keepers”.

The UN is also beneath contempt, just like the Nobel Committee.

Originally published on The West, Islam, and Sharia.
Also published on 1389 Blog.

More here:

This is 2011! Why do we still have pirates?

2011-02-23T15:13:00.000-08:00

Piracy should be a thing of the past.

Fox News: Four Americans Killed on Yacht Hijacked by Somali Pirates

(h/t: Bagua)

Four Americans aboard a yacht hijacked by Somali pirates were gunned down by their captors Tuesday.

U.S. forces responded to gunfire aboard the yacht Quest at approximately 1 a.m. Tuesday, but discovered all four hostages had been shot by their captors. Despite attempts to save their lives, all four hostages died of their wounds.

“We express our deepest condolences for the innocent lives callously lost aboard the Quest,” said Gen. James N. Mattis, U.S. Central Command Commander in a news release.

Two pirates died during the confrontation and U.S. forces found the remains of two other pirates already dead aboard the vessel. Thirteen pirates were captured and detained, along with two already in custody. A total of 19 pirates were involved in the hijacking.

The remains of the four Americans were taken aboard the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise, as were the 15 pirates in custody. There is no word yet on where the pirates will be taken for trial. They could go to Kenya or they could come back to the U.S. There is a precedent for both.

Read it all.

Pirates belong in the history books or the movies, not in real life. The United States has adequate naval firepower to put an end to piracy in international waters. The US Constitution empowers the US Senate and House of Representatives to do what is needed to get rid of this scourge.

Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution empowers Congress

...To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;...

Obama failed to take any action until it was too late. Yoo-hoo, Obama and the US Senate and House: You can't pussyfoot around with pirates. It's YOUR DUTY to defend the US against foreign enemies. In case you haven't noticed, pirates are foreign enemies, they have attacked us, and it's your duty to do something about it, without delay. You have to clean pirates out of the sea lanes, you have to sink all their boats and ships, and you have to take out the villages and settlements where they are based. The Senate needs to enact a specific declaration of war against these pirates and the House needs to vote funding to back it up.

None of this "nation-building" - just clean them out once and for all. If you fail to do that, piracy will rapidly grow out of control and maritime transport will become more and more dangerous and expensive. Allowing this piracy to continue will cost us, and the rest of the world, very heavily in the long run.

Says Iron Fist on a recent thread on Blogmocracy:

mawskrat wrote:

well at least Obama approved action if the Navy thought the hostages were in danger.

I call bull**** on that. The hostages were in danger from the minute the Somali animals took them prisoner. They should have threatened to bomb the pirates’ village flat if any of the hostages were harmed. Now they should follow up on that. Kill the village. Everyone in it. Flatten it with fuel-air explosives. Sink any vessels that try and make port there afterwords.

One of the problems that is hamstringing the US and other nations in dealing with pirates is the UN. That organization serves only to protect and foster evildoers all over the world; it's long past time to get the US out of the UN and vice versa, but that is an argument for another day. The problem is that current maritime law as defined by the UN makes no provision for dealing with pirates.

DNA India: Why we still have pirates in the 21st century

Gwynne Dyer / Sunday, October 10, 2010 22:14 IST
[...]
How can it have come to pass that we have a major pirate problem in the 21st century? They sorted that out in the early 18th century. Why has it got unsorted again?

Blame international law. When they were codifying the law of the sea back in the 1970s, the world had no pirate problem worth talking about. So they dropped the rule of “universal jurisdiction” that had been the key to suppressing piracy in the bad old days. “Universal jurisdiction”meant that every navy could arrest suspected pirates of any nationality and try them under its own national laws, since pirates had been defined as “the enemies of all mankind.” That’s how piracy was wiped out in the first place.

But when they were writing the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in the 1970s, there were no pirates anymore, so they dropped the rule of “universal jurisdiction” in favour of a legal regime more attuned to modern notions of human rights and national sovereignty. What has replaced those old rules, in practice, is a legal quagmire where you can never be sure who has legal jurisdiction. So the navies (which could easily suppress the piracy if they were free to act) refrain from using force, and are reluctant even to arrest people at sea who are quite obviously pirates.

To extinguish piracy again, we need a modernised version of the old rules. That requires prompt action to create a comprehensive international agreement that gets around the Law of the Sea.

There is one other issue, of course. If we use serious force against the pirates, they will threaten to use force against their captives. Some of them might be killed. But since there will never be a time when there are no captives in the hands of the Somali pirates until and unless we crack down hard, that is a risk that we just have to take.

Read it all.

A better idea: Ignore the UN entirely and go after the pirates. If anybody complains, ignore them also.

We dealt with jihadi pirates two centuries ago, during the Thomas Jefferson administration. We can do it again.

Originally published on 1389 Blog.

Ms Clinton and the UN Gun Stealers

2011-02-19T08:25:00.000-08:00

The United Nations, disguised as a well meaning arbiter of peace, decided a long time ago that regular people having guns is a bad thing. This fact would be undisputed by anyone who understood art and also noticed that large statue outside the UN (of a gun, with the barrel twisted in a knot. Note that this gun is not a military weapon). The reason for this - an armed citisenry like exists in Sweden and the US. Not knowing who has guns and how many of those would defend their rights against a one world or other hostile takeover would make taking over places like the US and Sweden a risky venture at the very least and quite possibly a fool's errand.

Enter Hilary Clinton. Enter the UN Small Arms Treaty.

Once again, this is not an effort to promote world peace. This is not a nuclear ban or a control of military might. Nebulously disguised as an attempt to prevent terrorism, global mafias and insurgencies (ie revolutions which might ouster one-world happy dictators), this treaty is a global gun control power grab.

In the end, it will require nations to register, confiscate and eventually ban firearms owned by private citisens. That's YOU and ME folks, not the mafiosi of the world. It's also, as usual, an assault on national sovereignty. Translation, another nail in the coffins prepared for independent minded nations like the United States.

Like everything else nefariously planned by the United Nations, it is a binding treaty which calls for Congress to approve of it. (Isn't that sweet, a nation voting for it's own demise?!)

Don't let your congress do this to you without your protest!! IT takes 65 Senate votes to approve of a treaty. As you know, once it gets passed congress, Obama will definitely sign it into law, so it's up to the Congress to stop it. But, there really isn't a solid pro-second amendment bloc in the Senate. Remember the confirmation of anti-gun Supreme Court Justice Sotamayor? Remember too how congress tends to back off making the President look bad on the world stage? And remember that our Secretary of State, appointed by the Obamanation himself, has promised to work closely with the United Nations to draft and promote this horrific idea.

Frankly the only way to defeat this nausea inspiring power grab is for every Senator in every district to believe that his or her seat is in grave danger if they get with this abhorrent program.

Money talks and B******* walks. They won't vote for it if they believe they will lose their jobs. Perhaps they will stand and say 'The people have spoken, we won't do this.' But I doubt it. More likely they will bury it in committee like they have with many other nauseating treaties. Or perhaps they will even disappear into the night to avoid this measure coming up at all like they did in Wisconsin...

Honestly, any of those would suffice, though I'd rather someone like Rand Paul or his father stand up and say "This is against our Constitution, take this treaty and shove it where the sun don't shine." Hey, I can dream, can't it?

Kosovo PM Linked to Sale of Human Organs

2010-12-15T16:51:00.000-08:00

Reprinted with permission from 2.0: The Blogmocracy
By Rodan

Hashim Thaci who was trained by AL-Qaeda in Afghanistan in the late 90′s and was the leader of their Kosovar affiliate, The KLA which has been linked to drug and human trafficking. This is no shocker to anyone who has been following the events in that region knew that not only were they Muslim Albanian Jihadists, they were also a criminal syndicate. It was these crimes and their terror attacked on Serbian civilians which lead in 98/99 to Serbia’s crackdown in the province. As usual the Progressives and Muslim nations claimed this was genocide and create false stories about the Serbs, just as they are doing with Israel today. The United States by our bombing of Serbia, help create this Narco-Islamic state. This Islamic and criminal regime is propped up by our tax dollars.

Hashim Thaci, who won re-election in the fledgeling country on Sunday, was described as the “most dangerous” of the leading mafia figures who emerged from the former Kosovo Liberation Army a decade ago. The report says that the West was aware of Mr Thaci’s crimes, yet backed his rise to power.

Members of his criminal organisation were said to be behind the trade in human organs when speciallyselected, mostly Serbian prisoners, were killed for their kidneys in a deal with an Albanian clinic, the report states.
[...]
“As and when the transplant surgeons were confirmed to be in position and ready to operate, the captives were brought out of the ‘safe house’ individually, summarily executed by a KLA gunman, and their corpses transported swiftly to the operating clinic,” said the report, due to be debated by the Council of Europe tomorrow.
[....]
The report concludes that Mr Thaci became “untouchable” because of his sponsorship by the United States and other western powers who were looking for a powerful figure to emerge as a political leader. Mr Thaci and his cronies remain free because key potential witnesses have been violently intimidated or killed, the report concludes

Read the rest: Kosovo PM ‘is Mafia boss linked to drugs and sale of human organs’

This is failure of US foreign policy. We gave created a haven for criminality and Jihad in Europe. Kosovo is an illegal nation as it’s a historical Serbian province which we illegally severed. While we claim we are fighting war on terror, we have enabled a terror regime in the Balkans. As the picture above shows, Bush who claims he was fighting terror smiles and shakes hands with a terrorist. As an American, I am ashamed of us supporting a vile organization like the KLA which is the Hamas of Europe. Clinton bombed Serbia, but it was Bush who recognized these criminals as a legitimate state.

Nice war on terror we have, we fight one Islamic group, while we support one of their affiliates. As the pictures below shows, it’s a Bi-Partisan problem.

Here’s Thaci and Biden.

Here’s Madeline Albright and Thaci after the bombing of Serbia in 1999.

This is your tax dollars at work!

Please write your Congressmen to get all American aid to Kosovo cut off. We should have no part of a criminal regime engaged in terror and criminal activities.

But wait, there's more...

Organ-ized Crime: Kosovo organ trafficking busted

UN War Crimes Tribunal Aided the Continued Jihadi Organ-Harvesting in Kosovo

Warning: Raw language and graphic subject matter!

Also see:

The racism of Obama's Administration: Sherrod

2010-07-25T11:06:00.000-07:00

I realize that Sherrod used the power and authority of her government position in the Agricultural Department in the 1980s to discriminate overtly against a farmer because he had white skin. Never mind that he is an American. She also used the phrase, "his people", code for white people because she no doubt uses "her people" to refer to people with black skin.

White people have been duped since the Civil Rights era to buy the line or belief system that they are the only ones who are or can be "racist." Clearly with the NAACP, the new Black Panther Party, Vance Jones, and Ms. Sherrod, racism in the Obama administration directed at white people rampant. It is "got after whitey and make him pay."

Enough already. We have paid and paid dearly for this multiculturalism and for the destruction of our educational system. I can say from personal observation though that many of our children regardless of the color of their skin are not receiving anywhere close to the educations we are paying for them to have access to.

A few years ago, if one looked at the welfare programs we had for the "disadvantaged", our national debt equalled the amount of money we were paying into worthless programs. I consider the WIC program beneficial for some as many of our Native American families have benefited from that program as well as other programs for aid to dependent children.

The one thing I like about the racism of Ms. Sherrod is that she admitted it and told of her abuse of office. Good for her. She's a racist looking our for "her people" and she says so.

I would only remind folks that when the twin towers went down the joy of the Islamists was that Americans were killed, whether "her people" or not. The idea was to kill Americans because we are all seen as infidels. Just a day or so ago, I read an article that showed the NAACP in bed with a Muslim American group. According to the Islamist 20 year plan, one of their goal in their steps to overthrow America is to 'hoodwink' black politicians to advance the Islamists' goals.

It is somewhat unsettling that our president supports racism in his White House and so with our "post racial" president, it seems we are becoming more distracted than ever.

With health care designed to deny us care, we should all be worried but white skinned people more it seems to me. Our heads are on the chopping block and if one were a conspiracy theorist, one could say that the goal is to eradicate our ethnic group.

So where is the National Association for the Survival of White People? Not the neo-Nazi stuff, just the average folks that know that their way of life and their lives are threatened.

But for Ms. Sherrod, good for her. She called herself out for her own blatant racism and abuse of power in her taxpayer funded job. Does she belong in any government job, no. But if one cleared out all of the overtly racist, anti-white folks throughout Obama's administration, D.C. would probably be empty.

Remember, the Islamists don't care what "race" you are. If you are an American, their goal is to kill you so in this case, the president better be looking out for all of "his people" which goes beyond skin color and starts and stops with Americans.

Sorry folks, I posted this here by mistake but think it can stand. The UN is our enemy as surely as Islamists are and 53 or more Islamic republics have representation in the UN and we the American taxpayer are paying for their corruption...

The ICJ Ruling and the Quisling Regime in Serbia

2010-07-24T13:31:00.001-07:00

Originally posted at 2.0: The Blogmocracy

In ICJ Ruling: Blow to Serbia, Boon to Tadic, noted author and scholar Srdja Trifkovic explains that the current government in Serbia is, in effect, nothing but a puppet regime that is selling out the Serbian people, and Judaeo-Christian civilization in the Balkans, to jihadi forces in the Balkans.

The back story is that, ever since Reagan left office, the US, NATO, and the EU have worked to assist the jihadis to form a Muslim stronghold in the Balkans. Obviously, this is counter to the interests of the US and of the nations that form the EU. (See Bosnia and Kosovo export Muslim terrorism everywhere.) But our politicians and State Department bureaucrats do the bidding of Middle Eastern oil interests, George Soros, and other nefarious individuals and groups such as Muslim narcoterrorist drug gangs, who covertly bankroll prominent members of the elite in politics, academia, think tanks, the media, and other areas of influence.

As I have pointed out before, the UN is thoroughly corrupt. Just about all NGOs do the bidding of this transnational elite. That obviously includes supposedly "neutral" entities such as the ICJ. The bureaucrats who enjoy cushy jobs at NGOs know what side their bread is buttered on, and they also know what the consequences of defying their masters inevitably must be.

Because the current government in Belgrade is nothing but a powerless American puppet that does nothing to protect the interests of the Serbian people, it is no surprise that the Tadic government will use the decision of the ICJ as a way to try to sell the Serbian people on the idea that they had better give up Kosovo, and continue to throw the remaining Serbs stranded there, under the bus - or else.

As Dr. Trifkovic points out, the time frame is much longer than anybody in Washington or The Hague is capable of comprehending. Kosovo has been Serbian as long as the Serbs have existed, the truth will eventually come out, and God is not mocked.

ICJ Ruling: Blow to Serbia, Boon to Tadic
By Srdja Trifkovic
Thursday, July 22, 2010 - 13:20

Ever since the U.S. intervened in Serbia’s domestic politics two years ago and helped the current coalition take power in Belgrade, Boris Tadic and his cohorts have been looking for a way to capitulate on Kosovo while pretending not to. The formula was simple: place all diplomatic eggs in one basket – that of the International Court of Justice – and refrain from using any other political or economic (let alone military) tools at Serbia’s disposal. On July 22 the ICJ performed on cue, declaring that Kosovo’s UDI was not illegal.

It should be noted that the ICJ has only assessed Kosovo's declaration of independence; it has not considered more widely Kosovo's right to unilateral secession from Serbia. Furthermore, the ICJ has not assessed either the consequences of the adoption of the UDI, namely whether Kosovo is a state, or the legitimacy of its recognition by a number of countries. The ICJ decision was unsurprising in view of the self-defeating question which the UN General Assembly posed at Serbia's request: "Is the unilateral declaration of independence by the Provisional Institutions of Self-Government of Kosovo in accordance with international law?" As a former British diplomat who knows the Balkans well has noted, international law takes no notice of declarations of independence, unilateral or otherwise; they are irrelevant:
[I]f the town council down the road here in the UK makes a solemn unilateral declaration of the town's independence from the UK, the rest of us will make a wry smile and go back to blogging or working. The declaration is 'in accordance' with UK law - free speech and all that. [ ... ] If citizens of our town en masse support the declaration of independence, put up road-blocks, stop paying taxes to Westminster and proclaim Vladimir Putin their new king with his consent, things begin to get more interesting. Norms are being created and broken in all directions.

The ICJ has done more than its share of norm-creation. Its advisory opinion is deeply flawed and non-binding, but the government in Belgrade now has a perfect alibi for doing what it had intended to do all along.

Following the appointment of Vuk Jeremic as Serbia’s foreign minister in 2007, this outcome could be predicted with near-certainty. As President Boris Tadic’s chief foreign policy advisor, Jeremic came to Washington on 18 May 2005 to testify in Congress on why Kosovo should stay within Serbia. In his subsequent off-the-record conversations, however, he assured his hosts that the task was really to sugar-coat the bitter Kosovo pill that Serbia would have to swallow anyway.

Two years later another advisor to Tadic, Dr. Leon Kojen, resigned in a blaze of publicity after Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer declared, on April 13, 2007, “We are working with Boris Tadic and his people to find a way to implement the essence of the Ahtisaari plan.” Tout Belgrade knew that “Tadic’s people” meant—Vuk Jeremic. Gusenbauer’s indiscretion amounted to the revelation that Serbia’s head of state and his closest advisor were engaged in secret negotiations aimed at facilitating the detachment of Kosovo from Serbia—which, of course, was “the essence of the Ahtisaari plan.” Jeremic’s quest for sugar-coating of the bitter pill was evidently in full swing even before he came to the helm of Serbia’s diplomacy.

In the intervening three years Tadic and Jeremic have continued to pursue a dual-track policy on Kosovo. The decisive fruit of that policy was their disastrous decision to accept the European Union’s Eulex Mission in Kosovo in December 2008. Acting under an entirely self-created mandate, the EU thus managed to insert its mission, based explicitly on the provisions of the Ahtissari Plan, into Kosovo with Belgrade's agreement.

That was the moment of Belgrade’s true capitulation. Everything else -- the ICJ ruling included -- is just a choreographed farce…

The ICJ opinion crowns two decades of U.S. policy in the former Yugoslavia that has been mendacious and iniquitous in equal measure. By retroactively condoning the Albanian UDI, the Court has made a massive leap into the unknown. That leap is potentially on par with Austria’s July 1914 ultimatum to Serbia. The fruits will be equally bitter.

Aiding and abetting Muslim designs in the Balkans, in the hope that this will earn some credit for the United States in the Islamic world, has been a major motive of American policy in the region since at least 1992. It has never yielded any dividends, of course, but repeated failure only prompts the architects of the policy to redouble their efforts.

It is virtually certain that Washington will be equally supportive of an independent Sanjak that would connect Kosovo with Bosnia, or of any other putative Islamistan, from western Macedonia to southern Bulgaria ("Eastern Rumelia") to the Caucasus. The late Tom Lantos must be smiling approvingly wherever he is now, having called, three years ago, on “Jihadists of all color and hue” to take note of “yet another example that the United States leads the way for the creation of a predominantly Muslim country in the very heart of Europe.”

In the region, the ICJ verdict will encourage two distinct but interconnected trends: greater-Albanian aspirations against Macedonia, Montenegro, Greece, and rump-Serbia (Preševo), and pan-Islamic agitation for the completion of the Green Corridor – an Islamic belt anchored in Asia Minor and extending north-westward across the Balkans into the heart of Central Europe.

Beyond the Balkans, it will breed instability in each and every potential or actual separatist hotspot, from Galilee to Kashmir, from the Caucasus to Sinkiang.

Kosovo is now an expensive albatross costing American and European taxpayers a few billion a year. It will continue developing, not as a functional economy but as a black hole of criminality and terrorism. The ever-rising and constantly unfulfilled expectations of its unemployable multitudes will eventually turn – Frankenstein’s monster-like – against the entity’s creator. There will be many Ft. Dixes to come, over there and here at home.

God acts in mysterious ways. Kosovo had remained Serbian during those five long centuries of Ottoman darkness, to be liberated in 1912. It is no less Serbian now, the ugly farce in Priština and at The Hague notwithstanding. It will be tangibly Serbian again when the current experiment in global hegemonism collapses, and when the very names of its potentates and servants – Boris Tadic and Vuk Jeremic included – are consigned to the Recycle Bin of history.

Here's the same article in Serbian.

Be sure to visit The Lord Byron Foundation for Balkan Studies to read many other articles about the Balkans counterjihad and how US and EU foreign policy has consistently favored our jihadi enemies.

UN supports pedophiles?

2009-05-12T07:01:00.000-07:00

Allow me to link a post written by MK at Crusader Rabbit: UN now fighting for pedophiles.

If already linked here, my apologies.

But it should come as no surprise that the UN is fighting for pedophiles while at the same time the UN wants to tax American citizens directly and essentially supports every Islamic terrorist state/nation that exists among its membership or seems to.

UN Rights of the Child TREATY must be stopped

2009-04-20T10:50:00.000-07:00

The purpose of this post is to link you to a post by WatchDog: Congress is attempting to take your parental rights away!

We have been hearing and fighting for years the attempts of the United Nations to push its camel's nose under the tent of the sovereignty of the United States of America. Nothing new on that but..

There seems to be a feeling of victory, a euphoria of power, churning in the Marxist-left of America's power elites that we have the votes, we have the power, and the time is now. Recall Hillary's It takes a village; and Obama's belief in the collective over the rights of the individual.

In WatchDog's first paragraph these words ring out: "The Obama administration is poised to adopt the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child."

This is a treaty pushed by the Obama administration, vehemently supported by Secretary of State Hillary CLINTON - a leading advocate and Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) who, according to WatchDog, vows the treaty will be ratified.

WatchDog's post delineates the parental rights and authority you will no longer have regarding your own children and their well-being.

Like so many initiatives that are swirling around us in these first 100 days, just like Obama's G-20 agreement to allow our banking practices to be evaluated by foreign sources, this "treaty" is just one more Draconian nail that is intended to be driven through the heart of America's national sovereignty.

International Response to North Korean Missile Launch

2009-04-05T22:09:00.000-07:00

The US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, was on ABC's This Week, April 5, 2009. She had a discussion with George Stephanopoulos on North Korea's missile launch and what the International response will be?

STEPHANOPOULOS: So what will this international response be?

RICE: Well, George, we have been in close consultation with our allies in Asia, in particular, Japan and South Korea about the appropriate response. We have consulted over the last several days, including this morning as well with the Russians and the Chinese.

So the U.N. Security Council will meet this afternoon in emergency session. I'll be going up there straightaway. And we will be discussing the appropriate response. The United States believes that this action is best dealt with -- the most appropriate response would a United Nations Security Council resolution.

So what will this international response be? Translation: NOTHING

STEPHANOPOULOS: So there will be new sanctions toughening...

RICE: George, we have 15 members of the Security Council and -- including the permanent five, so we all need to come together around this. But the United States' view is, this is serious, it's a violation, and it merits and appropriately strong United Nations response. We'll be...

So what will this international response be? Translation: NOTHING

STEPHANOPOULOS: But you can't say yet what those consequences will be. And there is no guarantee that the U.N. today or over the course of next week is going to impose sanctions on North Korea...

(CROSSTALK)

RICE: George, we need to continue to work closely with our allies Japan and South Korea, with partners in the Security Council to achieve united action. And that's what we will do.

So what will this international response be? Translation: NOTHING

transcript sources: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/04/susan_rice_on_this_week.html
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/story?id=7261522&page=1

Martha Raddatz said in the roundtable discussion that 'a forcebul statement' is probably all there is. She also said that Barack Obama is learning how difficult diplomatic relations can be and that the situation he is in is no different than what George Bush faced.

Maybe the US can join its partners at the United Nations to solve this problem.

UN Security Council fails to agree on North Korea reaction
Los Angeles Times - 3 hours ago
South Korea’s UN envoy Park In-kook, center, arrives for the UN Security Council emergency session in New York. The US sought a resolution as an appropriate ...

So what will this international response be? Translation: NOTHING

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

UN's Attack on the Industrialized Nations

2009-03-27T06:28:00.001-07:00

We are following the Piped Piper of Death when it comes to the newest UN's walk down the Climate Change Lane. Let's see: we are under attack by the Islamists to destroy Western Civilization and throw us back into their 7th Century; by the United States Obama Administration's march into Socialism/Totalitarianism that even the EU Socialists say is too much; and now we have to deal with the U.N. 'Climate Change' Plan Would Likely Shift Trillions to Form New World Economy.

Let me add that in all three cases, we, the average American people, have no defenders in the "physical" realm except God if He wants to take further risks on us. Actually, our own government seems to be against us. Even one British MP says for us not to go down the road to socialized medicine but nothing will keep Obama from rationed health care. And his willful handmaiden, our own shrew, San Fran Nan, says we need to decrease our population - to paraphrase a time-worn mantra of "kill the unborn children." No need to limit ourselves to the unborn children when rationed health care can do the job by denying care to the very sick and/or the elderly.

And from Key Elements of a Global Deal on Climate Change by Nicholas Stern, Lord Stern of Brentford, we have (from page 3) an interesting note on "transfer resources and technologies to developing countries" by industrial nations - which would be the United States:

"Developed countries will need to take on immediate and binding national
emissions targets, demonstrate that they can achieve low carbon growth, and
transfer resources and technologies to developing countries, before developing
countries take on binding national targets of their own by 2020."

H/T to Matt Drudge and his link: "UN Climate Scheme: Reordering world economy, trillions in wealth transfer, sweeping 'industrial relocation'..." Americans have already "transferred" trillions of dollars of their wealth down the rabbit hole.

But I just cannot help myself and ask how much money Al Gore is getting with his "carbon footprints" hocuspocus magic trick?

Americans - as do many citizens in other industrial nations - need defenders and statesmen in elected office and right now they are few and far between.

To me, there is no question that the United Nations is in frontal attack against the United States of America. Let's kick them out of Turtle Bay and give the property to the homeless. They'd make better use of the place even if they trashed it...

(Cross-posted at Conservative Beach Girl)

UN SecGen Ban calls US "deadbeat"

2009-03-12T06:40:00.000-07:00

Oh, the irony. We throw away over $1 billion annually, handing it over to an organization largely comprised of single party or totalitarian governments, lorded over by non-elected political appointees...and the presiding appointee wants to call the United States a "deadbeat"?

Wow. Take a good long look in the mirror, Mr. Ban. The organization you head is a true deadbeat, a political sacred cow that has long since lost its relevance to the world.

Obama, Race and Durban II

2009-02-19T23:47:00.000-08:00

More on the Obama Adminisration and troubling trends are in the news. It is not a surprise nor necessarily atypical for a President of one political party to undo that of a former President of another party. The Obama Administration rescinded the Mexico City Policy ban on funding foreign abortions which has a history of reversals with each change in President of the opposing party. He appeared to be reversing policy on Gitmo but the jury is still out on that one. And the liberal fringe is not happy about the new President's action or inaction on Iraq and Afghanistan or some other matters.

Does it seem odd to you that the President Obama's first foreign trip was to Canada while his new Secretary of State headed for Indonesia and China and the rest of Asia? It is not unlike an opinion voiced by Rush Limbaugh on news the President does not favor the Fairness Doctrine. El Rushbo suggests we should not be optimistic about the news in that Obama did not say something like he would not sign or would veto such legislation. Alternatively, Limbaugh suggested it as a trait of the new liberal President to not spend political capital when he can get others to do it. That may also explain his trip to Canada. And Hillary is simply trying to add to her lacking resume' for 2012. But Canada is boycotting Durban II. Hmmm.

That brings us to this issue, Durban II. The US and Israel were the only countries to vote against it in 2001 or beyond. Now that Obama is in office funny how the UN's agenda on race again takes center stage. In the past there was the suggestion that opponents of Israel would use the opportunity to gain advantage by using international events to portray Israel and/or the US as racist. Given Obama and Holder's notable quotes on the topic this may be of some concern to the public at large. Another reversal of Bush 43 policy which may also prove to be dangerous.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Op-Ed: Boycott Durban II

Jewish Telegraphic Agency, NY - Feb 18, 2009
The April 2009 Durban II conference promises to top that fiasco, despite the Obama administration's decision to attempt to influence the process. ...

Can the United States fix Durban II?

Reuters - Feb 18, 2009
Israel and Canada have already announced they would boycott “Durban II,” as the conference is being called, and the Bush administration was opposed to the ...

Obama officials meet US Jews to explain their Durban II policy

Human Rights Tribune, Switzerland - Feb 18, 2009
Jerusalem fears that the "Durban II" summit, set to be held in Geneva this April, will be used by Arab nations and others as a forum to criticize Israel as ...

Obama, Clinton Send Political Clone to the UN

2009-01-29T19:46:00.001-08:00

Another in a long list of additions to the Obama Administration reinforces the concern that while Hillary Rodham Clinton was unsuccessful in becoming President she succeeded in establishing a third Clinton term in spite of the loss. Susan Rice is US Ambassador to the United Nations and was a member of the Obama Biden Transition Team as well as senior foreign policy adviser for their 2008 campaign.

It has been said of Obama that filling vacancies from the previous administration demonstrates a preference for persons with impressive resumes' in both education and experience. This selection was no departure from that criteria or strategy. A Wikipedia account of Dr Rice states her father told her to 'never use race as an excuse or advantage' and that she was concerned her accomplishments would be viewed as the result of affirmative action. Her personal success is impressive. It is possible she hails from a family with above average means so affirmative action should be a moot point. But what if any is the role of nepotism?

Madeleine Albright is described in the same account as a family friend and mentor to Rice. She urged Clinton to appoint Rice as an Assistant Secretary of State in 1997. While she impressed many and certainly enough to be confirmed others felt she was inexperienced and inflexible. A few years in the Clinton Administration and then to the Brookings Institution. A common career path for unemployed public servants similar to former Congressman becoming lobbyists. Next up the Clinton Obama Wars and filling the Administration with former staff to appease the Clinton clan before the convention. Oh there's no nepotism here. And this is not a criticism directed at Rice for it is the case with most if not all Obama selections. So how is that working or shaping up for the average citizen?

Regarding President Obama's election UN Sec Gen Ban Ki Moon expressed 'Our goals are shared. Together, the United States of America and the United Nations can look forward to a new era of strong and effective partnership, delivering results and the change we need.' If you take that statement at face value avoid persons selling infrastructure in Brooklyn or vacant land in Florida. Moon had more to say. Earlier this week, he welcomed Mr. Obama's election “with great optimism,” noting that the UN and US have many common goals. By his own admission and that of Obama and Clinton these goals include but are not limited to the following:

United Nations reform (which will never happen)

Climate Change (or the promotion of more gloom and doom)

The Darfur Peace Process ( which does not exist, resembles the climate change item and is as likely to fail as that in the Middle East )

Global Economic Crisis (his words, and something these spendthrifts no nothing about )

But what Ban Ki Moon and the rest of the posse at the UN were really interested in was this.

UN Launches $613 Million Appeal for Gaza
By Lisa Schlein
Geneva
29 January 2009

The United Nations is appealing for $613 million to help tens of thousands of people in Gaza recover from the three-week Israeli military offensive in the Palestinian territory. The money will provide life-saving assistance over the next six to nine months. The U.N. appeal was launched at the annual World Economic Forum in the Swiss alpine village of Davos.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is the first world leader to enter Gaza since Israel imposed a blockade on the Palestinian territory in June 2007. He describes his distress at what he saw.

And how does Moon qualify for the designation in the report above as a 'world leader'? More to the point is what does the UN do besides make headlines and statements when they're not collecting money and using it for who knows what? Could it be that aside from all the other conspiracy theories about the UN that they are quite happy with the Middle East conflict as another venue to work their craft of separating people from their money and giving it to their friends? If you object to that suggestion please explain why none of their 'programs' end in success or just end? Sustaining conflict in the world would be of benefit to them given their methods of operation.

So what does Dr Rice bring to the party?

26 January 2009 – There is no more important forum for effective cooperation among States that the United Nations, the new ambassador of the United States to the United Nations stressed today, following her first meeting with Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

“I am looking very much forward to engaging in a cooperative, constructive fashion with my colleagues here in New York. I will listen, I will engage and I will work to advance United States interests, recognizing that in many, many instances, our national interests are best advanced when we are working hand in hand with that of others,” Susan Rice told reporters at UN Headquarters in New York.

Ms. Rice said she had an “excellent meeting” with the Secretary-General, covering a range of issues including climate change, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), UN peacekeeping, non-proliferation, Sudan and the situation in the Middle East.

“The United Nations is a vitally important institution. It has great potential. It still has room for great improvement,” she said, adding that she and Mr. Ban also touched on the challenge of making the Organization more effective and more efficient.

She recalled that President Barack Obama had wanted to place the US at the centre of the fight against poverty, and had stated that the MDGs – the globally agreed targets to slash poverty and other development challenges by 2015 – were now US goals.

Based on President Obama rescinding The Mexico City Policy, the liberal thirst for abortion and a press conference by the executive director of the UN population fund the crew must be drunk with sadistic pleasure over the spoils of a political victory. Here's the damming evidence from the UN press conference in their own words.

“President Obama’s actions sent a strong message about his leadership and strategic vision to support causes that will promote peace and development, equity and dignity, equality for women and girls and economic empowerment of the poor in all regions of the world,” she said. With the resumption of United States funding, UNFPA would be able to maintain recent gains during the current financial crisis and provide support to women in the poorest countries of the world. United Nations Member States had repeatedly said that progress for all would not happen without progress for women. That meant making women’s health, rights and equality an international priority.

She also welcomed the decision of the new United States administration to revoke the Mexico City policy, which paved the way for a restored United States partnership with some of the world’s leading non-governmental organizations that provide family planning services around the world. Access to safe and effective voluntary family planning, as Mr. Obama had said, was one of the most effective ways of preventing unwanted pregnancies and empowering women and men to plan their families. If a woman could not take decisions about her own fertility, she could not make decisions about anything else in her life.

And the final expression of support for 'safe' abortions as 'family planning'.

To a question about family planning, she said that its importance was demonstrated by the fact that unsafe abortion was considered the second leading cause of death for African women. Women who did not have access to family planning would go to have unsafe abortions, which often led to death.

Translation:: The money is used to pay for abortions the 'patient' cannot afford which would lead to back alley practitioners who care less about the patient than the liberals care about the unborn child. And 'family planning' is liberal-speak for abortion. The only reason they support contraception is political. It gives them another pork item to support in legislation and lets them believe they have convinced you they are trying to do things the right way. Could it be any more pathetic?

So Dr Susan Rice will be doing the bidding of Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Bill and Hillary Clinton. Keep in mind both Clinton and Obama rescinded the Mexico City Policy. Also notable is Obama's weakness for ACORN and voter and campaign finance fraud as well as the Clintons' scandal history including illegal transfers of sensitive technology via Chinagate. The perils of international politics grow larger. And the threat is not always from without but within.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

I hate the UN: $23 million mural paid for in part with foreign aid funds.

2008-11-20T11:31:00.000-08:00

The U.N. Human Rights Council, frequently accused of coddling some of the world's most repressive governments, threw itself a party in Geneva Tuesday that featured the unveiling of a $23 million mural paid for in part with foreign aid funds.

In a ceremony attended by U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, Spanish artist Miquel Barcelo told the press that his 16,000-square-foot ceiling artwork reminded him of "an image of the world dripping toward the sky" — but it reminded critics of money slipping out of relief coffers.

"In Spain there's a controversy because they took money out of the foreign aid budget — took money from starving children in Africa — and spent it on colorful stalactites," said Hillel Neuer, executive director of U.N. Watch.

Click here to see photos of the $23 million ceiling art.

A Vow from the United Nations

2008-08-07T05:55:00.000-07:00

"Violent incidents and casualties have declined and we have witnessed
the improved performance of Iraq security forces during a series of
operations," said Lynn Pascoe, U.N. undersecretary-general for
political affairs.

Lynn Pascoe may 'have witnessed' the improvements but failed to
recognize in this quote that the US military is solely responsible for
the success. Funny how the UN is quick to criticize the US, do
little or nothing to support the effort, make casual reference to
improved conditions on the ground and whine that political progress is
needed. Besides being the same old tired response, it is
certainly not timely, insightful or valuable.

In a briefing for the U.N. Security Council, Pascoe said that it was
necessary to cement security gains with "strengthened and sustained
political dialogue" among the country's rival factions.

This partial quote hardly merits comment as it is simply a continuation
of the anemic sideline play-by-play offered by the United Nations.

"The U.N. has been doing all it can to urge practical compromises,"
Pascoe said. "A failure to come to agreement on a law at this time
would be a major setback, not only for the prospects of elections this
year but for the larger process of national reconciliation in Iraq."

Almost like an endless loop cassette the UN expresses what everyone has
already heard or read from numerous other sources. Would it be
too much to ask that the United Nations use their lackluster influence
on their own membership to expedite solutions by tabling the separate
member agendas and advancing proposals in the best interests of the
target country, in this case, Iraq. And perhaps they could
convince those holding prominent positions in the Iraqi 'government' to
delay their self-serving practices used for personal gain until the
ordinary citizens are afforded something that resembles a 'normal' life.

As for the opening of the last quote, 'the UN has been doing all it
can....' is certainly as understatement. That an organization can
continue to present such absurd statements in view of all they have
never done says it all. The only possible use for the UN is
providing a mouthpiece for members to express views for which they do
not want to take the heat. It is easier to let the organization
(UN) receive the criticism rather than the real source(s).
Everyone is guilty so no one accepts blame. The sad history of
international politics continues as it always has and the United
Nations plays its role in supporting the insanity.

The Security Council is expected to vote on Friday to extend the
mandate of the U.N. mission in Iraq, which has vowed to expand the role
of the United Nations there.

Here is a vow you can count on. Do you remember what the UN
mission did in Iraq when the heat was turned up last time?

UN leaves
skeleton staff in Iraq

Last Updated: Tuesday, 30 September, 2003, 06:56 GMT 07:56 UK

The United Nations has again cut the number of its international staff
in Iraq due to security concerns, leaving fewer than 50 foreign
employees in the country.

More than 30 UN international staff pulled out of Iraq over the
weekend, but UN spokesman Fred Eckhard said other staff were still
entering Iraq.

Before the 19 August car bomb attack on the UN headquarters in Baghdad
that killed 22 people, the UN had more than 600 staff in Iraq.

Why does the UN need a mission is Iraq? They certainly can
provide nothing from a remote location. Or is it to justify more
donations from member countries like, I don't know, the US? If
anyone can cite examples when the United Nations did something
impressive, please advise.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

2008-07-31T11:14:00.000-07:00

U.N. Site Truly a Garbage Dump

The United Nations' world headquarters in New York City lies on a foundation of rotten garbage — literally.

The world body recently began a six-year, $2 billion renovation project known as the Capital Master Plan. As workers began prepping the 38-story Secretariat for renovations, a "rotten eggs" smell began seeping from one of the underground levels below the building.

Suspecting that a gas line may have been punctured, workers for the Skanska Corporation, the lead contractor, had the U.N. order a limited evacuation of the Secretariat.

Several hours later, Skanska and U.N. officials, joined by utility company and fire department personnel, traced the smell not to a gas line, but to a vast underground landfill

Source Here - scroll down to No. 3.

Somewhere in the world, the person responsible is laughing hysterically and I am laughing with him.

How very, very fitting.

UN Threatens Religious Freedom and National Sovereignty

2008-07-13T23:46:00.001-07:00

"First, they came for the socialists,
and I did not speak out
because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one
left to speak for me."
- Martin Niemoller (1892-1984)

I suppose it was only a matter of time before the one worlders in the UN decided to launch an attack on freedom of religion. Actually, they have been doing it for a while, but they are tightening the noose with greater and greater pressure on countries who believe it is in their best interest to bend the knee to the almighty UN. The one of the more recent abominations is the "UN Resolution on Defamation of Religion." The link goes to a UN press release about the monstrous document.

This is the brainchild of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference). The OIC started ramming the idea down the throat of the world after 9/11 and increased the pressure after the infamous Mohammed Cartoons. According to Pakistani President Musharraf, it was necessary due to "desperation and injustice" felt in the Muslim world because of the cartoons, counter-terrorism measures, immigration laws and the like. The non-binding document passed 108 to 51, with 25 abstentions. The US was one of those who voted against it.

Leo said it was because 'this resolution is incomplete inasmuch as it fails to address the situation of all religions. We believe that such inclusive language would have furthered the objective of promoting religious freedom. We also believe that any resolution on this topic must include mention of the need to change educational systems that promote hatred of other religions, as well as the problem of state-sponsored media that negatively targets any one religion, or people of a certain faith.'

Well, he does partially get it.

The resolution benignly states that everyone has the right to freedom of expression. All well and good, everyone does have that right. However, the document is not a call to tolerance of all faiths. In addition, it is filled with lies. While pointing out a 'negative projection of Islam in the media,' it also says that 'Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism.'

OK, so Buddhists and Jews populate Al-Quieda, I suppose. And I suppose that people in the Sudan are not enslaved and tortured for their beliefs? I suppose it is not a human rights violation to arrest a woman for being alone with the men who raped her. Right and I am a tiger lily.

The fact is that acts of torture under Islamic rule are verified, discrimination against non-Muslims takes place in many Islamic countries on a regular basis and non-Muslims are frequently persecuted in the name of the prophet. It is true that not every Islamic country persecutes actively. Kuwait is pretty tolerant, and Turkey as well. However, Muslims around the world need to acknowledge that there are places out there that do these things in the name of their faith.

And another thing, as pointed out by bloggers who were as diverse as the rainbow (such as Pagans, Christians, and Humanists), WHAT exactly is defamation?

Is it defamation to point out that the man who committed an honour killing last week was a Muslim? Is it defamation to mention that Mohammad had people killed if they disagreed with him? Is it defamation to criticise the tenants of Islam by doing a critique of the Koran? Without a definition, many atrocities could take place and persecution could result in countries that were not outwardly Muslim if a Muslim managed to be offended too strongly.

I know it has nothing to do with freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof as defined in the US Constitution. It does not take a rocket scientist to deduce this if you look at those who voted in favour of this resolution. Muslim countries could not possibly have meant to criticize their own behaviour; they could not have wanted to embarrass their own governments. Included in the list of those who voted for the resolution are: Bhutan: No idea what freedom of religion is. China: Not Free (they regulate everyone from Christians to Feng Shui experts) Cuba: not free for years Pakistan: They cannot even decide if it is ok for other Muslims to play instruments Russia: Not as bad as they were before, but the noose is tightening again. Saudi Arabia: Very oppressive. My ex could not buy a coke when he was stationed there because the company was 'owned by Jews' and magazines would be cut to pieces by censors before they arrived by anything other than military mail.

Not only this but the document sez what while 'everyone has the right to freedom of expression,' it should be 'exercised with responsibility and may' (there had to be a *but* in here somewhere) 'be subject to limitations as provided by law and necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order, public health or morals...' Ahem. In other words, freedom of religion can be regulated to death in the name of public order.

This is how non-secular Muslim nations behave now. And the hidden agenda of the whole exercise is to make it politically impossible to criticise Islam. And considering the fact that simply converting to another faith, belonging to another faith, or evangelising for another faith is illegal and punishable in many Muslim countries, it makes sense that defamation includes all of the above. Converting is a criticism of Islam. If Islam were fine, one would not leave it. Believing in another faith indicates that one does not put faith in Mohammad or the Koran, which indicates that you see error. In addition, evangelism often includes apologetics, which is a direct criticism, and involves at least one and possibly two of the other 'attacks' listed above even if no discussion of comparative religions actually occurs.

Therefore, you see, this resolution is an attempt to put a muzzle of the free expression of religion all over the world. (What the Muslims dont get is that eventually, in the New World Order, they will be outlawed too. Those who wish to dominate the world have no problem indulging 'fanatics' for a time in order to achieve their goals.) Judging from the blogs I have read, running the gamut including Pagan, Christian and Humanist, I think that many people have figured the first part of this out. And I am glad of it.

What few officials discuss, however, is the attack on national sovereignty this piece of work actually is.

The document states: The Council also strongly urges States within the framework of their own legal and constitutional systems to provide adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and their value systems and to complement legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance.

In other words, the UN gets to tell other people what laws need to be enacted to make sure nobody picks on Muslims. We do not get to keep our own constitutions, unless of course they make the right provisions.

Then, the document 'urges States to closely control all public officials including members of law enforcement bodies, the military, civil servants and educators, so that in the course of their official duties, they respect different religions … and that training is provided to this effect.'

In other words, making stupid, unenforceable documents like the UN Resolution are not acceptable on a national level. Actual nation-states are supposed to create or train a thought police.

It is non-binding, of course. However, everyone knows that on the world stage, once the UN speaks people are expected to listen. And they have started to do so.

- Award-winning author Mark Steyn has been summoned to appear before two
Canadian Human Rights Commissions of vague allegations of "subjecting Canadian
Muslims to hatred and contempt" for comments in his book, "America Alone"
- In the United Kingdom, police announced plans to arrest a bloggers for
"anti-Muslim" statements.
- In the United States, a plaintiff sued his Internet service provider for refusing "to prevent participants in an online chat room from posting or submitting harassing comments that blasphemed and defamed plaintiff's Islamic religion."
(source)

The US needs to kick the UN off US soil and withdraw. Unfortunately, unless more people think like Ron Paul, it will not happen.

Sources for further reading:

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2004/hrcn1082.doc.htm (the original document)

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=13958&Cr=religion&Cr1= (Un Press Release)

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=69163 (WorldNet Daily Article)

https://www.aclj.org/petition/Default.aspx?AC=DNE0807017&SC=3359 (American Center for Law and Justice Petition ot the UN)

http://www.iheu.org/node/2816 (international humanist and Ethical Union Article)

http://sweetness-light.com/archive/un-resolution-protects-only-islam-from-defamation (Sweetness and Light - Scroll down to the "Ask the Imam" section, where an Imam describes what "Freedom of expression" and "Freedom of Religion" means in an Islamic State)

http://www.volokh.com/posts/1170874980.shtml (Interesting political theory about this topic)

http://www.aina.org/news/2008079165111.htm (The Assyrian take on it)

UN's zero-tolerance policy on child molestation a sham

2008-05-27T14:47:00.000-07:00

From CNN:

Children as young as 6 have been forced to have sex with aid workers and peacekeepers in return for food and money, Save the Children UK said in a report released Tuesday.

After interviewing hundreds of children, the charity said it found instances of rape, child prostitution, pornography, indecent sexual assault and trafficking of children for sex.

"It is hard to imagine a more grotesque abuse of authority or flagrant violation of children's rights," said Jasmine Whitbread, chief executive of Save the Children UK.

In the report, "No One To Turn To" a 15-year-old girl from Haiti told researchers: "My friends and I were walking by the National Palace one evening when we encountered a couple of humanitarian men. The men called us over and showed us their penises.

"They offered us 100 Haitian gourdes ($2.80) and some chocolate if we would suck them. I said, 'No,' but some of the girls did it and got the money."

Save the Children says that almost as shocking as the abuse itself is the "chronic under-reporting" of the abuses. It believes that thousands more children around the world could be suffering in silence.

If you read the whole thing you'll find mention of an investigation that started last year, where a handful were jailed, and a few others faced the gallows, er, I mean they were dismissed or repatriated. Talk about effective deterrence.

The Balkan Crisis All Over Again?

2008-02-21T09:43:00.000-08:00

Will tensions erupt over Kosovo's looming independence? That is the question that has sparked debate across much of Europe and in the United States.

British and NATO troops have been deployed to help maintain the peace which, as you might have expected, is a fragile one.

Russia, naturally, opposes Kosovo's independence, and does not recognize the new country, while America, the UK, Germany and Italy have all officially declared Kosovo's sovereignty.

The brutal civil war that swept across Serbia in the 1990's should be a reminder to all free nations that we must quickly intervene if violence spreads. Tyrant-States like Russia benefit from instability, but the Free World does not, and never will.

Britain has sent her last troops into the region, and hopefully other European nations will follow the UK's lead. While it is unlikely that the same levels of genocidal slaughter will occur, it is always better to err on the side of caution. In Africa thousands of lives could have been saved if the West had responded sooner in such critical locations as Rwanda and Liberia. The United Nations has made sure that this sort of swift, effective action will never occur.

This is the duty and responsibility of Free Nations. Our wealth, our strength, and our ideals all dictate that we stand up for Peace and Freedom wherever it is threatened, and at whatever cost. The alternative is allowing oppressive dictators of the world free reign.

There are greater dangers than terrorism in the world. Terrorism is just a symptom of a larger strategic battle, as is the instability and poverty and civil war in Africa. Poverty is a problem. The lack of women's rights is a problem. Islam is a problem. When poverty, the suppression of women, radical Islam, and no free speech or free press are combined, the seeds of terrorism and revolution are easily sown. This lack of stability is a perfect weapon for Tyrant States and Rogue Nations such as Syria, Russia, China, and Iran.

People have scoffed at Bush's "Axis of Evil." I only wish he had included more nations under that umbrella.

And isn't it also funny how many of these Tyrant States and Rogue Nations have a say in the UN Security Council? Does that not cast doubt on the validity of that organization?

It is high time that the Free World casts off the chains and constraints that the corrupt United Nations has bound us with. The UN should act as nothing more than a summit for diplomats. America and our Allies should not be held back by the agendas of the corrupt, nor by the policies of totalitarian, fascist, or theocratic States, whose agendas are beyond suspect. How can we ever hope to fight, let alone win, the War on Terror if we are forced to compromise with the Sudan, Syria, or other Terrorist sponsors?

A new alliance must be formed. America is the leader of the free world, but in the coming years we will need strong allies. Before Europe becomes Eurabia, let us hope they build up not just a strong military, but a social bulwark against Islamification. The first step in this process should be abandoning the UN, whose member States have banned any and all criticism of Islam, essentially rendering that organizations' efforts against terrorism null.

John Bolton's Surrender is not an Option

2008-01-03T11:18:00.000-08:00

In Surrender is not an Option, John Bolton does not disappoint; if anything, his words based upon his experience will infuriate. He addresses the UN, the EU and the interesting point that England and France are part of the Permanent Five on the Security Council but both have given up national sovereignty for the EU, thus giving the EU more "say" on the Security Council, more "veto" votes. One could argue that the EU undermines the intent of the United Nations' Charter and one could further argue that the North American Union will further weaken United States of America's influence while doing nothing to lower our "assessed" monetary contribution. Bolton suggests "voluntary" payment of such assessments and to that I say, good idea! Let's do the same with our taxes. Pay the assessed taxes on a voluntary basis - if we see our money supporting people who abuse the system; cut them off...;

Although not specifically referencing Election 2008, Ambassador Bolton writes these words on page 407, "As a career Foreign Service officer once said, if the American people knew how we formulated policy, they would be after us with pitchforks."

Well, don't be blinded by the politicians of the liberal left seeking the presidency or by those on the right who tout "the new world order and globlization. What the left cannot get through legislation, they get through activist liberal judges; what they cannot get through activist judges, they will get through the UN one incremental step at a time undermining our Constitution and our Bill of Rights, starting with "grabbing" your handguns - how? By making the Constitution of the United States "bow" to the dictates of the EU through the UN, by eroding our national sovereignty.

The United Nations is NOT our friend; with a few exceptions, the nations there are not our friends; and they seek to destroy us through one treaty, one accord, or another.

Our Election 2008 does not end at our shores; the results can further chart our destruction right here at Turtle Bay in New York City. America, the United States of America, does not need any terrorists even half as determined at the nations of the UN aligned against us. Between the Executive Orders of the Clinton years, the Signing Statements of the Bush 43 years, and the various anti-Americanism as well as anti-Semiticism of the UN historically - we'll need a sharp "America-first" president to protect us from the machinations of many UN members. As an aside, we may want to recommend that the EU, formulated as it is as a "nation", have only one seat on the Security Council. Hey, they wanted the EU - the European Union - they've got it.

Read John Bolton's book, Surrender is not an Option, from the beginning. It'll make you disgusted; even more so when it finallt dawns how little he was really able to tell us - the American people - in those 456 pages.

Surrender is not an option but pulling in the UN and many of its mighty little anti-American potentates is a must. Also, we need to enact our laws against treason and such against our liberal leftists when they cross the line. But we must reduce our contributions to the UN and fund only the programs that 1) work and 2) have "supplied by the United States of America" on the bags of food, medicines, and other items we supply.

We simply do not need to pander to the Islamists and other anti-American factions of the UN. We certainly don't need to give them access to such good real estate, and we don't need to burden or add to New York City's crime/criminal element.

We must be even more wary of the UN as its member-states work to undermine our national sovereignty. Let's follow the UN Charter or pull out...

Another Threat to Sovereignty

2007-12-28T10:38:00.000-08:00

It seems that our fearless leaders who hang out around the beltway seem to believe that it's not a good thing to be a US citisen anymore. It's far better, evidently, to be subject to a universal, world organisation. And they haven't even chosen or invented a good one to hand national sovereignty to, they've decided the United Nations is the one world organisation of choice.

I could give reasons based on creditials alone as to why this particular body would not be a good choice even if forking over national sovereignty actually WAS a good idea. Honestly, has this body ever done anything right? Where are the WMD that the UN was supposedly wanting to monitor in Iraq? The UN never said they were disappearing, they just whined what they couldn't look at them. UN sanctions against "rogue nations" have never worked. The body is rife with scandal, mismanagement and violations of it's own laws. It sucks up money from it's members (or the ones who pay them anyway) and deliver very little back to them. WHO ON EARTH would want this brain trust in charge of anything!!

However, that's not what has me irritated. I don't believe forking over national sovereignty is a good idea in the first place. I have several fairly old articles posted explaining how things related to the UN undermine said sovereignty. These would be CEDAW, , the creation of world heritage sites , Conference on Human Settlements , the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. These articles explain in detail why each of these things are a bad idea and what it would mean to the United States if they were applied to citisens here. And just because I've not said anything at Screw the UN recently does not mean threats have disappeared. They haven't.

Today's threat Du Jour...H.R. 2421, "Clean Water Restoration Act." But wait, isn't that federal legislation, not a UN treaty? Oh, but don't run off so fast, lately things are never what they seem. According to this Act, water is very important. (Um, duh.) This legislation claims to Sounds good so far. It protects intrastate waters and "OTHER WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES." (always get suspicious of government paperwork which has the word "other" in it. It's a frivolous term used to mean "everything else I can think of" or "whatever we decide later") The legislation does attempt to define these "other waters" and here is what our hacks have come up with...

"All waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and
all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes,
rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands,
sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds, and all
impoundments of the foregoing, to the fullest extent that these waters, or
activities affecting these waters, are subject to the legislative power of
Congress under the Constitution."

Now, what word DON'T you see in this lovely masterpiece of legal mumbo jumbo? Well I suppose fishtank isn't in there and neither is bathtub, but those aren't what I was thinking about. The important word missing is "navigable." See, water that can't support ships and stuff has always been the property owner's property to do with what he or she likes, that's the way previous legislation has always defined it. Standing water, farm ponds, sink holes and such are automatically private property cause, well you can't run a ship through it.

This bill has nothing to do with making sure we have safe drinking water for all the people and animals that depend on it. It's about restricting land use. It used to be said that if a person had a large puddle on their property and the government wanted your land it would be labelled a "wetland" and had to be protected...Now the government doesn't need to contort itself that much. Your mud puddle, creek, personal swamp, whatever, are "other waters of the United States."

Now, in case you think you're lost, you're really not. So far I have not mentioned the UN. This, so far, has ended State Sovereignty and Private Property rights if the government so chooses to exercise the power vested in this abominable legislation. That is bad enough. However, there is more.

There is the "LAW OF THE SEA TREATY." (aka as LOST). The Law of the Sea Convention is a set of rules for the use of the world’s oceans, which cover 70 percent of the earth’s surface and a treaty resulted in 1982. To date 154 countries and the European Community have joined. So far the US has not joined this treaty. At the time Reagan was in power and refused to sign the abomination. He even fired people for suggesting he do so. Eventually Clinton did sign it, but the Senate has refused (so far) to ratify it.

If we did we would be subject to the UN Court and UN rules about various things including fishing, environmental protections, and navigation. IF the US Senate ratifies LOST and HR 2421 kicks in, the United Nations will in effect have jurisdiction over our private property. Remember how inclusive the "other waters of the United States" can be. You really want some uneducated nutcase from some minor third world nation telling you what to do with the sink hole in your backyard?

Christmas and the Troops

2007-12-22T21:19:00.000-08:00

In the spirit of the season of giving this Christmas post is dedicated to the men and women of the United States Armed Forces around the world in places like Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Also in the spirit of the season it should be made clear that goodwill toward men is a phrase that requires setting aside other matters if only for a moment as dictated by circumstance. With that in mind you may still find it a little peculiar that there would be a kind word for an outfit like MoveOn.org. But hey, it's Christmas and regardless of anything else and that things may change shortly, one should give credit where credit is due. Assuming this is not a hoax and ignoring the natural tendency to comment on items outside the scope of the story, Stanford Matthews from the Blog @ MoreWhat.com would like to go on record thanking those at MoveOn.org for raising a serious six figures for the troops at Christmas.

Even The Grinch Would Like This: MoveOn Raising Money For Troops
By Martin Kady II
Dec 21, 2007

(The Politico) Remember that whole "General Betray Us" advertisement back in September that criticized Army Gen. David Petraeus?

Well MoveOn.org, that scourge of the right wing, is raising money like crazy for a Christmas gift for the troops.

In the past 24 hours, MoveOn, perhaps the most powerful liberal advocacy group in the country, has raised $275,000 for the United Services Organizations (USO) for calling cards for U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. The USO may be most associated with Bob Hope-type visits to troops overseas, but the non-partisan organization is clearly comfortable partnering with MoveOn if the cause helps soldiers stationed overseas during the holidays.

It is not a surprise that President Bush would again remind the country of our troops and their families for the incredible sacrifice and commitment being contributed daily. At the very least we can remember them in our prayers and spread the word so they know we are thinking of them and exceedingly grateful for their service. The President's weekly radio address included an often repeated sentiment for the troops as reported by VOA. Try to ignore the remainder of the report about someone else's take which is not so pleasant.

President Bush Praises US Troops, Their Families
By Sean Maroney
Washington
22 December 2007

In his weekly radio address, President Bush thanked U.S. troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan and their families for their sacrifices. "This Christmas, many will sit down for dinner thinking of their loved ones half a world away. These families deserve the thanks and the prayers of our whole nation," he said.

There are news reports of generous efforts being provided by the public and various organizations to help the troops have some kind of Christmas away from home. If you want to help there are nearly countless ways to pitch in. If you have no idea where to start, simply use google and type the words troops and Christmas. Plenty of results will point you in the right direction. Or of course you can check with the DOD, any of the armed services, the USO or your elected representatives or the VA or someone.

And finally, let's make that annual effort to extend the good we think of during the holidays so the New Year can bring the kind of solutions needed to solve some of the world's problems. If we all try again and keep repeating these sentiments to each other long enough, we might finally succeed with some major improvements.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year or whatever sentiment does it for you. Cheers.

Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com
(the link just above takes you to a good Christmas story)

Get rich quick, join the Bluehelmets.

2007-12-18T16:35:00.000-08:00

The model for a one-world government, the organization tasked for world peace, is in a nutshell, beyond repair:

"The task force identified multiple instances of fraud, corruption, waste and mismanagement at U.N. headquarters and peacekeeping missions, including ten significant instances of fraud and corruption with aggregate value in excess of $610 million," said one report by the task force, headed by a former federal prosecutor in Connecticut, Robert Appleton.
The new corruption cases highlight the limits of reforms imposed since the early 1990s, when a previous buildup of peacekeeping missions led to reports of rampant corruption in Cambodia, Somalia and the Balkans. In response, in 1994 the United Nations created the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS), but it has a poor record of holding corrupt officials to account.

UN Trademarks: Failing and Fundraising

2007-12-11T19:34:00.000-08:00

Back to one of the stories that demonstrates the United Nations continuum. An internet search of the word continuum may give you definitions the ease of which to understand equals the difficulty of determining where all the money goes after being given to the international organization whose name implies a lofty goal. The same can be said for the program known as the Millennium Development Goals that it happens just received an evaluation from 'educators.'

Earlier reports on this topic pointed to the low probability of the goals being achieved over a 15 year period and how that plays into the UN's strategy. Propose unrealistic goals while ignoring the conflicting agendas, collective plausible denial, timetables designed to out live participants or oversight and infinite appeals for funding always reported as inadequate. If the United Nations is not the real world version of the fairy tale goose that lays the golden eggs it is close enough.

A group of educators, donors, lobbyists and most likely UN reps held a meeting to discuss the MDG education program status and funding. It would almost seem incredible that what are supposed to be intelligent people could use the same words and phrases over and over again, year after year, to describe more failures and pandering for more money with no shame. The trick is one has to pay attention to every word and you quickly notice nothing is being said but the hand is out.

Half way through the 15 year goals timetable, just like earlier reports of other programs, they may mention the original goal more or less specifically but it is followed by vague and broken descriptions of what has happened to date. That is followed by excuses that funding was inadequate and more is needed. The cycle repeats until a new program is launched that also accomplishes nothing but requires continuous funding. Hence, the reference at the top of this post about the UN continuum. Here are some examples from the latest report.

"We are really making progress," he said. "There are huge challenges, but progress is being made to achieve this important goal."

After a slow start in the 32 countries funded by the Fast Track Initiative, their annual report says by 2010 most will have 100 percent of kids start first grade.

7 or eight years into a 15 year program the 'slow start' means they have completed nothing. They probably reason that if you bought the program to begin with and nothing is even remotely close to complete at the half way point, you're good for believing that 3 more years story. By then you will have forgotten about it or another classic excuse will be provided right before the appeal for more money the destination of which no one knows outside the UN.

"I would say the most critical issue is that the governments are making education a priority," he said. "It is a political will issue and they are really making very rapid progress. They have got a lot of catching up to do. They are moving faster than any region has ever moved before."

How's that for 50 words that say nothing? The report admits widespread corruption that is standard for UN operations. Can you say Oil for Food Program? And their audacity is unmistakable. Right after essentially saying nothing which translates into these programs are totally useless, true to form the final comment from a spokesperson is:

"Overall, we need another $6 billion U.S. per year just to get every child to complete a primary cycle of education," she explained.

source: http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-12-11-voa50.cfm

Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

How UNRWA Creates Dependency

2007-12-03T22:17:00.000-08:00

From YID With LID

As a people, the Palestinians are addicted to their equivalent of Crack Cocaine--It's not a chemical dependency it is a financial dependency. The drug is called the United Nations Relief and Works Agency or UNRWA.

The UNRWA is one of those self-perpetuating bureaucracies that you hear conservative politicians rail against. And like all self-perpetuating bureaucracies, their mission is to maintain the status quo--but in this case maintaining the status quo means preventing peace.

Washington Times: How UNRWA creates dependency

December 3, 2007

By Asaf Romirowsky and Jonathan Spyer - For Israelis the United Nations is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, they are fully aware of the anti-Israel sentiment that the United Nations perpetuates, but on the other hand they want to be part of it and to have their voices heard. This stance is understandable. But it produces positions which sometimes directly contradict Israel's clear interest.

Observe: During a recent conference titled, "Hijacking Human Rights: The Demonization of Israel by the United Nations," Daniel Carmon, Israel's deputy permanent representative at the United Nations stated that "We [Israel] encounter hypocrisy and cynicism on the one hand, and we are all witness to that when we walk into the building, but we are also trying with relative success to identify how, within the existing mandate, [to find] parallel paths of working with the world body." Reflecting this problematic and paradoxical Israeli stance, Mr. Carmon urged the approximately 200 conference participants to state that UNRWA (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian refugees in the Near East) was "doing a good job" providing humanitarian assistance to Palestinians in the Palestinian territories.

The matter of UNRWA perhaps above all others illustrates the difficulty of the Israeli position on the United Nations. Israeli officials well tell you that if UNRWA does not take care of Palestinian needs then these will become Israel's responsibility. And despite UNRWA's well-documented terrorist ties, Israel prefers not to bear this burden.

This position produces a situation in which Israel itself ends up forming one of the factors blocking the way to the dismantling of UNRWA. UNRWA, in turn, is a central factor blocking a solution to the Palestinian refugee issue - which is one of the central factors preventing the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Understanding the way that UNRWA helps perpetuate the Palestinian refugee problem requires taking a closer look at the way that the agency functions. Doing so reveals the workings of a dysfunctional bureaucracy.

While Palestinian refugees benefit materially from UNRWA, the agency benefits in return from the refugees. The refugees are the organization's raison d'etre. And bureaucracies tend to dislike dissolving themselves. So, like any good bureaucracy, UNRWA has zero incentive to resolve the Palestinian refugee problem if it is to continue to exist. Ending the refugee problem would render UNRWA obsolete.

Instead, UNRWA finds a hundred and one ways to perpetuate Palestinian dependency. The interests of the refugees and UNRWA are fatally intertwined; UNRWA is staffed mainly by local Palestinians - more than 23,000 of them - with only about 100 international United Nations professionals. Tellingly, while the U.N. High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) and UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund) avoid employing locals who are also recipients of agency services, UNRWA does not make this distinction. Terrorism does not exclude one from being a part of UNRWA. In fact, quite the opposite is true: UNRWA-overseen hospitals and clinics routinely employ members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Employing Palestinians for decade after decade and providing them with subsistence-level food aid and rudimentary education are a far cry from giving them usable skills and a positive attitude about creating their own independent economy and viable civic institutions.

In addition, the Palestinian agenda (and sympathy for the Palestinian cause) have infiltrated every aperture at Turtle Bay. UNWRA has spent decades keeping this single issue, key to the organization's survival, at the forefront of the U.N. agenda whether it belongs there or not. It has engendered Arab and Western support for the delegitimation of Israel, and facilitated comparisons between Nazism and Zionism - a false linkage that bolsters Palestinian claims of oppression. When former Secretary-General Kofi Annan appeared at a U.N. "Palestine Day" event which astonishingly featured a map of the Middle East that conspicuously omitted Israel, it was emblematic of the way in which the United Nations has transformed itself into a propaganda machine for such thinking. UNRWA has no parallel in the U.N. system. UNRWA is dedicated solely to providing assistance to Palestinian refugees; no other group of refugees, whatever their circumstances, warrants this much attention.

As we look toward the future of Israeli-Palestinian relations, the United Nations as a member of the Quartet has a special obligation to uphold the commitment outlined in the 2003 "road map" for Israeli-Palestinian peace to dismantle terrorist capabilities and infrastructure. In an effort to insulate good works from terrorist infiltration and exploitation, Washington should stand ready to help the United Nations live up to this obligation by funding an "Office of Competent Standards" for UNRWA and similar agencies.

It's also in the interest of Israel to support such an initiative. As it stands, the self-perpetuating bureaucracy of UNRWA is one of the central factors offering day jobs to members of terror groups, propping up Palestinian dependency and perpetuating the myths and falsehoods about Israel which help prevent a solution to the conflict.

Asaf Romirowsky is the Manager of Israel & Middle East Affairs for the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia and an associate fellow at the Middle East Forum. Jonathan Spyer is a Senior Research Fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center in Herzliya, Israel.

Posted by Yid With Lid at 12/04/2007 04:06:00 AM

Technorati : 1389, Israel, UN, corruption
Del.icio.us : 1389, Israel, UN, corruption
Ice Rocket : 1389, Israel, UN, corruption

UN Money Game Includes Global Warming

2007-11-28T08:44:00.000-08:00

Listen up fans of international politics. The United Nations is borrowing a page from the uber liberal playbook. Do your best to stir guilt within the richest in the industrial nations so they may follow by preaching to ordinary citizens to justify spending public funds for private agendas. With a knack for plagiarism that would have Joe Biden blush, the UN is adopting the methods of the man who fathered the global warming ponzi scheme, Al Gore.

Are there environmental issues that pose a threat to the long term health of the biosphere we call Earth. Yes. But the current frenzy and panic caused by Al Gore and friends has nothing to do with that. Ecology and all things environmental are nothing new. Even before the sixties when such terms became household words much had been written and addressed on the topic. If two so-called oil shortages or crisis situations took place with no substantive demand or economic viability of alternative forms of energy as a result over the last 30 or 40 years, it is fair to say that few people took the notion seriously enough, including the scientific community, to implement effective change.

Oh, it was or is a corporate conspiracy. Ya, like the 100 or 200 mpg internal combustion engine they bought and hid from the public. So now, why is every other corporation on the planet tripping over themselves to jump on board of Al Gore's Good Ship Eco-flop? There's gold in them there hills, that's why. And it did not take very long for the United Nations to wake up to that fact. There never ending pursuit of guilt dollars with which to line their pockets now includes posturing on the global warming scare.

Hedging their bets with the advent of cascading failures related to the flagship Millennium Development Goals, supporting Al Gore's global warming scheme with appeals for money of their own indicates a true talent for extortion. But then you may need to read the full article to appreciate the style with which the scam is presented. Apparently for some, having a large contingent supporting the current rage on GW with an equally large contingent rejecting the notion has not sent up enough red flags leading to a continued search for the truth.

UN Says Billions Needed to Help Poor Countries Deal with Climate Change
By Marianne Kearney
Jakarta
28 November 2007

The United Nations is calling on developed countries to donate billions of dollars to help poorer nations deal with the devastating effects of climate change. Marianne Kearney has more from Jakarta.

A new report by the U.N. Development Program paints a dire picture of how poor people will be affected by climate change. The report calls on first world countries to pay for the damage their greenhouse gas emissions inflict on developing nations.

Two-thirds of the world's poor live in Asia. The U.N. warns they will be especially vulnerable to the effects of rising temperatures, even if tough measures to limit greenhouse gas emissions are implemented now.

Hakan Bjorkman, the U.N. Development Program's country director for Indonesia, says more funding is needed to help poorer countries avoid loss of life and income as a result of droughts, flooding and food shortages.

"Only $26 million have been spent through the UNFCC mechanism on adaptation, while something like $86 billion is needed by 2015," he said.

Bjorkman says most of the funding to help countries deal with the effects of climate change has flowed to wealthy nations rather than poor ones.

In addition, the U.N. estimates that a fund of $25 billion to $50 billion a year is needed to help developing countries switch to cleaner energy sources.

The UNDP's report says a rise of just two degrees in the oceans' temperature would cause glaciers in the Himalayas to melt, affecting the food and water source for two billion people in Asia. Increased flow in the region's rivers would displace 22 million people downstream in Vietnam alone.

The UNDP also warns that rising sea levels would cause the collapse of coral reefs, affecting coastal communities in Indonesia and elsewhere in Asia.

The report calls on developing countries to cut their greenhouse emissions by 80 percent by the year 2050, and says India and China should cut their emissions by 20 percent in the same time frame.

Bjorkman says there is a stark difference between the ability of rich and poor countries to adapt to global warming.

"For example, in the United Kingdom where $1.2 billion is being used to prepare for flooding, in the Netherlands people are investing, with government support, in some kind of floating houses, so when the flooding comes they can actually float up," said Bjorkman .

While in Ethiopia, adaptation is about women having to walk much further to get water and in Bangladesh its about people building flood shelters on bamboo sticks and in Vietnam there are swimming lessons for women and children."

The U.N. report also warns that in Indonesia, climate change has already helped lead to an increase in water borne diseases such as malaria and dengue, and in child malnutrition.

Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

2008 Interational Year of the Potato.

2007-11-26T00:33:00.000-08:00

Potato, the fourth major food crop in the world, is in the limelight. The United Nations has declared 2008 as the 'International Year of Potato (IYP)'. The declared mission of IYP is to increase awareness of the importance of potato as a food in developing countries, and promote research and development of potato-based systems as a means of contributing to the achievement of the UN millennium development goals.

According to James Godfrey, chairman of the Board of Trustees of the International Potato Centre, Peru, "World potato production is about 320 million tonne a year, and this makes potatoes the most important root and tuber food crop in the world. Its food productivity per hectare is about four times greater than that of cereals, and it can be harvested before it reaches maturity, thus providing an important role in food security, which is so critical to many families."...

**Have they nothing better to do with their time? Maybe ending slavery, slaughter in the Sudan, womens rights you know minor stuff like that.

crossposted @ Newportcity - Year of the potato!

Corrupt, bigoted former head of UNMIK, Bernard Kouchner, is back in the news...

2007-11-18T06:38:00.000-08:00

Clowning in a rap video with a jihadist!

Gates of Vienna: Rappin' With the Jihad

Saturday, November 17, 2007
by Baron Bodissey

A scandal is brewing in Germany, although there's not much about it to be found in the English-language media. News stories concerning the incident have appeared - for example, this one in The Daily Telegraph - but they only give a bare-bones description of the event. It's an official press-release version, describing a feel-good Multicultural occasion when the German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Bernard Kouchner, his French counterpart, did a little off-key musical number in a recording studio with a Turkish-German pop singer.

Nice moment. "We are the World". Music will bring us together. Etc., etc.

What these MSM stories won't tell you is the background of the pop singer these two political bozos joined up with for their Terpsichorean moment. Muhabbet - he seems to have only a single name, like Cher, Sting, or Madonna - is not your average Turkish-German rap singer: he has this nasty little habit of promoting violent jihad in his songs.

I first became aware of this story a few days ago through the German blog Politically Incorrect...

...Muhabbet apparently is touted as some sort of integration wunderkind: He's a UNICEF-representative for education, and a frontman for the anti-violence campaigns of the ministry for family and education. He flies on the minister's plane and was dined by the chancellor, Angela Merkel...

A vitriolic jihadist who works for UNICEF? So much for the UN!

But we remember Bernard Kouchner from Kosovo!

Kouchner accepted the position of UN administrator in Kosovo in the aftermath of the Kosovo War. But as these articles reveal, Kouchner stood by and did nothing as the KLA, Albanian narcoterrorist/jihadists affiliated with al-Qaeda, fought among themselves, endangered UN personnel, and slaughtered or expelled most of the remaining Serbian population of Kosovo.

France Profonde - Tim King on French politics: Kouchner at the New Republic

In the major Swedish daily newspaper Dagens Nyheter we have recently been reading investigative reports by Maciej Zaremba (probably Sweden's most well known and respected investigative journalist) on how the UN has acted in Kosovo. Since Mr. Kouchner for a while was the UN's High Representative in Kosovo he is to a large extent responsible for the development there. And the UN has failed miserably according to the articles in Dagens Nyheter. Corruption has been widespread, especially so among some companies from presumably less corrupt countries, as the UK and Iceland. After countless billions of EUROS there is almost nothing to show for it in Kosovo, except for fancy cars driven by foreigners and brothels visited by the same foreigners.

Mr. Zaremba shows how the French government saw Kosovo as a chance for French companies to make money. Below follows my quick and imperfect translation of a part of Mr. Zaremba's text; the quotes within the text are from Mr. Zaremba...

Bernard Kouchner a crime boss in Kosovo

When Bernard Kouchner lands in Kosovo in the summer of 1999 there is no mobile telecommunication. German Siemens and French Alcatel submit one offer each. A panel of local experts select Siemens. The offer is the cheapest and it is not colonial. At a fixed lump sum the Germans promise to build a network for Kosovo. The French offer says the network would remain French property and the country code of Monaco would be utilized.

What happens? Bernard Kouchner, Kosovos legislator, head of government and head of justice, all in one person, replaces the UNMIK director of post and telecommunications, an Albanian, with a certain Pascal Copin, who in turn awards the contract to Alcatel. It is the only feasible solution, claims Copin, because only Alcatel (in a collaboration with Monaco Telecom) can provide Kosovo, not a formal state, with a country code.

Result: Seven years later Kosovo boasts the worst and most expensive telephone system in the region, concludes the European Council. Yet every time a Kosovan lifts the receiver, money rattles into French and Monegasque bank accounts, and we are not talking about small money. Close to a hundred million euros over the years, more than Swedens annual aid to Kosovo...

Bernard Kouchner's Legacy of Failure (11/7/2000)

We have long complained about the U.S. news media and its failure to inform the public about the Clinton Administration's legacy of anarchy and mayhem in Kosovo. The news media in the U.S. has been virtually silent about the ongoing genocide against Serbs and other minorities who continue to be victimized by terrorists associated with the "disbanded" KLA and its sympathizers in the U.N./KFOR occupation.

Over the past few months, though, the level of bloodshed has increased enough that news of it begins to trickle through the blockade in the mainstream U.S. news media.
In a 'Newsweek' interview May 15, Bernard Kouchner, the U.N. official in charge of the occupation of Kosovo, even admitted, "Apparently a Serb has a 20 times greater chance of being a victim of a crime than an Albanian does." But the tone of the Newsweek interview made it clear that neither Kouchner nor the magazine's interviewer were unduly concerned about this fact...

Clearly, Kouchner has sided with the Islamists all along!

So why did Nicholas Sarkozy appoint Kouchner as foreign minister?

Was it cluelessness?

Or was it appeasement?

Or, perhaps, was it because Kouchner knows where the bodies are buried?

Technorati : Gates of Vienna, Islam, Kosovo, Serbia, UN, United Nations, corruption, jihadism
Del.icio.us : Gates of Vienna, Islam, Kosovo, Serbia, UN, United Nations, corruption, jihadism
Ice Rocket : Gates of Vienna, Islam, Kosovo, Serbia, UN, United Nations, corruption, jihadism

UN Spins Economics of Africa

2007-11-16T09:37:00.000-08:00

There is a noticeable amount of chatter regarding economic issues of Africa lately. For how long has it been claimed that the poorest, most destitute group of people live in Africa. Or more accurately, the people living in Africa may represent some of the world's most needy populations until the UN is seeking money by using other examples. Then that part of the world is in the worst shape. But that is not really the issue of economics in Africa either. First, an excerpt from a current quote from someone from the United Nations on economics and Africa.

"What we are advocating is that these intellectuals give priority to Africa. If you go to the U.S., you go to other countries, there are outstanding African intellectuals and economists working in this context, in these institutions, and they are involved in a lot of global issues, and their voices are being heard," said Janneh. "We are saying, this is fine, continue to do so, but reserve a substantive portion of your intellect, or your attention, on African issues. Once you do that, I think it is fine. Do not leave this to outsiders."

What is the United Nations if not outsiders no matter where they are? And has economics become the current buzzword for their agenda? It seems that it was just moments ago they were describing the inhabitants of Burma as the most economically disadvantaged due to the financial rape by a military junta of a country with abundant resources. A situation allowed to continue fo decades. Another example of the impotent, incompetent or simply corrupt nature of the United Nations and their claim to be representatives of international cooperation.

So the United Nations once again is serving up sage advice for individuals with African roots to dedicate some portion of their skills and expertise to economic development of their home country even though they may no longer live there. And yet the very outsider influence typically sought by the UN is at least temporarily being rejected in the case of Africa. A continent the UN most often pleads for as a worthy recipient of food and medicine to cover the basic needs of impoverished citizens. In addition, the UN is not formally discouraging the outside influence they want native talent to replace.

Delegates to the U.S.-Africa business summit say Africa is open for business. Many sub-Saharan economies are growing by more than five percent per year. Wiseman Nkuhlu of Pan-African Capital Holdings says much of the continent has entered a productive era.

The first concern should be whether or not private sector involvement in Africa's economic development will result in common exploitation of vulnerable socieities plagued by corruption internally and externally. Not like the UN has been without the influence of corruption but the internal variety in the form of military dictators or the flux of near continuous civil war or the ravages of rebel militias are a constant risk to investment even if it is entirely benevolent.

The following is not an example of benevolent economic development but merely a common tactic to profit indirectly from investments that do not have the host country's best interests in mind.

China Invests $5.5 Billion in South African Bank
By Delia Robertson
Johannesburg

In the largest post-apartheid direct investment deal in South Africa, the state-controlled Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, ICBC, has purchased 20 percent of Standard Bank, South Africa's largest lender.

Many reports coming out of Africa are suggesting various economies on the continent are emerging as competitive. At best, with countries like Zimbabwe yet in political turmoil and others simmering from recent widespread violence or devastation by disease or natural disasters, honest and effective development will certainly not come from the pathetic fiasco known as the Millennium Development Goals. That said, Africa's chances for avoiding scams from strangers bearing gifts may expose them to an equal risk. With the United Nations talking about African economic development that outcome is almost guaranteed. So Africa will have to survive more decades of abuse before they may emerge viable as an economic force able if not willing to attend to the needs of their citizens.

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Link: UN sub Human Rights Council to Adopt Barbarian Agenda

2007-11-02T18:47:00.001-07:00

UN sub Human Rights Council to Adopt Barbarian Agenda

UN Set to End Scrutiny of Cuba and Belarus, Indict Israel; 27 NGOs Protest

"UN's last chance to save the Human Rights Council from itself," says UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer

This is a stunning indictment of the islamisation of the UN. What does it take for us to stop funding this tool for the coming caliphate?

For all practical purposes, the name should be changed from the Human Rights Council to the Savages Right Council. This is sick. Morally ill.

Technorati : Cuba, Israel, UN, United Nations
Del.icio.us : Cuba, Israel, UN, United Nations
Ice Rocket : Cuba, Israel, UN, United Nations

The UN Production of the Flim Flam Man

2007-10-28T13:56:00.000-07:00

A scarred reputation from the oil for food program, the failing Millennium Development Goals, another lame example of international intervention featured prominently in Burma as well as the abuses of sex scandals and general corruption now lay the back drop for a budget increase at the United Nations.

By Patrick Worsnip
Thu Oct 25
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon proposed on Thursday a rise in the U.N. budget for the next two years, seeking extra funding to head off conflicts and promote human rights amid new demands on the world body.

By EDITH M. LEDERER, AP
Thu Oct 25
UNITED NATIONS - The U.N. Secretary-General proposed a two-year budget of $4.2 billion on Thursday, saying the small increase isn't much in light of the growing demands on the United Nations to address a range of diplomatic and security challenges.

What a preposterous notion noted in the two news reports. Ban Ki-Moon apparently cites heading off conflicts, growing demands and addressing diplomatic, security and human rights issues as reasons for a budget increase. In the private sector, bottom line and key performance measures commonly dictate funding parameters for future allocation of resources. Not unlike most governments, public sector organizations in general draw no attention to the fact that no budget decisions reflect the effectiveness of the entity seeking more money. School boards and other local government bodies as well as state and federal governments routinely raise budgets without the corresponding justification of successful past performance.

In the UN's case, the Millennium Development Goals alone are sufficient cause to deny budget increases. The little that will prove successful over a minimum of two decades demonstrates clearly that the UN has never possessed the ability to be effective. Certainly there are numerous other examples of the organizations futility but the MDG have special significance. The initiative was to benefit all people of the world who suffer from common deficiencies related to poverty, hunger, disease and similar difficulties not related to the benefit of any particular country or group. So even programs that remove any suggestion of favoritism are beyond the UN's ability to achieve success.

"That is not much, considering the demands upon us," he said, naming conflicts and potential crisis areas as well as longer-term challenges of alleviating poverty, providing humanitarian aid and fighting climate change and HIV/AIDS.

Listening over and over again to the identical sounds of each United Nations pronouncement.... last year .... $3.8 Billion. Price of allowing this scam to continue..... limitless. Let's see Mastercard do an ad on this. There are many voices echoing the call for an end to the United Nations and it is not limited to any one website. Whether campaign rhetoric or not, several US Presidential candidates have made equivalent statements. It may be necessary to engage in the typical demeaning activities characterized by radical public protests. Thoughtful communication focusing attention toward the flaws of the United Nations may already having the needed impact, one post at a time.

One last note on the words of Ban Ki Moon. An example of his budget increase justification specified an amount for an extremely vague purpose. $18 Million dollars to 'strengthen the Department of Political Affairs.' How about using at least that much money to do some good for the people you are charged with serving, e.g., helping. And by that it is not meant that the money should be given to those within the United Nations organization. That is the biggest problem. All that money that never gets to a legitimate destination.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Have the UNMIK abuses turned the Serbs against America and Western Europe?

2007-10-27T11:31:00.001-07:00

You probably won't know the answer to this question:

Are Serbs, and Serbian-Americans, on your side?

You can't imagine that the Serbs could possibly be on your side? Especially after everything that's happened in the past sixty years, including eight years of the UNMIK debacle? Think again!

It may surprise you to know that, even now, Orthodox Christian Serbian-Americans pray every Sunday in church for America's government and armed forces. Serbs in Europe do much the same. Serbs, in Serbia and elsewhere, are waiting for Americans to come to their senses about jihadism in the Balkans and elsewhere, preferably before it's too late to avoid widespread destruction to what's left of the civilized world!

Download this book - FREE of charge - and read the other articles that follow.

Shameful Betrayal of General Draza Mihailovich, Hero of Two World Wars

Free book available in PDF format, courtesy of Andy Wilcoxson:

Gen. Mihailovic's only crime was resisting the twin evils of Hitler's fascism and Stalin's communism...

"Because the book is out of print and the publisher went out of business more than 50 years ago copies of it are hard to come by, so I scanned my copy, and through the magic of the Internet you can download your own copy of the book in PDF format by right clicking this link and selecting "Save Target As" (please note file is 137 MB)." ...

General Mihailovich fell seventeen months after the so-called "liberation" of Yugoslavia. Reports from Belgrade on March 24th, 1946, announced his capture under puzzling circumstances on March 13th, 1946. His trial before a Communist military court began on June 10th, 1946. He was "sentenced" to death on July 15th, 1946, and murdered on July 17th, 1946.

General Mihailovich is no more. He has departed this world convinced that he was abandoned by the Allies. The voices that were raised abroad in his defence were not allowed to reach him and he died without the satisfaction of knowing that in the opinion of many he died an innocent man and a great soldier.

General Mihailovich is no more, but the legends of his heroic deeds are becoming more and more popular and they live in the hearts of the people.

General Mihailovich is no more. He has departed this world. Those who have murdered him have not only perpetrated a crime, they have also committed a grave mistake, for democratic public opinion is well aware of General Mihailovich's merits.

General Mihailovich is no more. The last words of this great patriot were concise and poignant. He said:

"I strove for much, I undertook much, but the gales of the world have carried away both me and my work."

But wait, there's more!

Kosovo, Serbia's Cross to Bear: Serbia pays 100,000 US$ each day for Kosovo's debt, even though it gets no revenue from the province.

Who restarted the Cold War? If there was ever a case of pot calling the kettle black! The article explains how Russia offered its friendship and the Clinton and Bush Administrations ruthlessly abused it. But it's not too late to change the situation for the better.

New Information and Key Trends Regarding Islamic Extremist Groups in the Balkans: About the insanity of US foreign policy in the Balkans, in which the Clinton Administration fought against the Christian Serbs, on behalf of Bosnian and Albanian Muslims - including those who were, and still are, the local branches of al Qaeda in the Balkans. The Bush Administration has done nothing to reverse this failed policy, and Hillary Clinton would only worsen it.

Dissecting the UN Debacle in Kosovo

Capt. Lance Peter Sijan, USAF

COUNTERTERRORIST BLOG SWARM WANTED!

Petition to Demand Investigation of UN Bribery Scandal

It takes a mighty big person to repent these days!

Dissecting the UN Debacle in Kosovo

2007-10-19T15:44:00.001-07:00

This four-part series on the Kosovo UN debacle is worth reading word for word!

From Kultur&Nöge (Sweden):

Part 1: Report from Unmikistan - Land of the Future

Part 2: The UN state and the seven robbers

Part 3: Complain in Azerbaijan

Part 4: Prowess, courage, and plastic socks

Still not sure what's going on in Kosovo? Then read this:

My Article in American Legion Magazine

Posted by Julia Gorin under Republican Riot, June 30th 2007 01:26:27 PM

Dear Readers,
I wrote an article titled "The 'Successful War' we Lost in Kosovo" for American Legion Magazine, the publication of America's largest veterans organization. Because its articles aren't available online, I've scanned it in. Here are the links, from page 1 to page 6 (though the article is not a full six pages):

Page 1, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, Page 5, Page 6

FYI: Draza Mihailovic is mentioned.

But wait, there's more:

Press clips and blogs everywhere reveal UN ineffectiveness, incompetence, and corruption

Six to Eight KFOR Tanks in Serb's Garden

No prize for guessing who's on Al Gore's side

Democracy Albanian Way: Molotov Cocktail for Serbian Church

The fish rots from the head...

Of course, much of this occurred on Kofi Annan's watch. Will he ever be held to account?

(cue sound of crickets chirping)

On the contrary; Kofi Annan was rewarded with half of the Nobel "Peace" Prize in 2001.

And al-Goracle? What does he have to do with it?

Not too many people still remember Al Gore's role in this. But Al Gore is equally culpable because - as far back as July, 1992 - he was a major instigator for the Clinton Administration's misguided war against the Serbs that made this whole debacle possible. It should surprise no one that he, too, was awarded the same prize in 2007. Obviously the fix is in!

Posted on Screw the UN, 1389 Blog - Antijihadist Tech, and Fort Hard Knox

Technorati : Ahtisaari, Albania, Bush, Clinton, Gore, Kofi Annan, Kosovo, Serbia, UN, United Nations, al Qaeda, bribery, corruption, jihadism
Del.icio.us : Ahtisaari, Albania, Bush, Clinton, Gore, Kofi Annan, Kosovo, Serbia, UN, United Nations, al Qaeda, bribery, corruption, jihadism
Ice Rocket : Ahtisaari, Albania, Bush, Clinton, Gore, Kofi Annan, Kosovo, Serbia, UN, United Nations, al Qaeda, bribery, corruption, jihadism

United Nations Was Never the Point

2007-10-19T10:53:00.000-07:00

If a country has been ruled by a military junta since 1962 and is currently engaged in a 'crackdown' against citizens they deem problematic, what possible relevance does forming a committee to develop a constitution possess? If 15 or 20 years have gone by with no measurable progress on implementing reforms announced, the answer to this question is simple. The military bullies are simply posturing for the international media, the United Nations and anyone else silly enough to view this latest report as meaningful.

The UN and at least one NGO have indicated millions of people are or may be starving within Burma. This is beyond the number of victims produced in the military regime's current abuse of the Burmese people. The response by the international community has been the typical sanction threats or actions, the usual suspects dissenting on any action against the ruling thugs of Burma and almost everyone else largely ignoring the entire situation. At least that is how it appears with no solution provided and the UN doing the usual kabuki dance.

You can take all the ideologies on the planet and throw them out. If every country was forced to survive only with what is available within their own geopolitical boundaries we would soon learn that from a practical standpoint we need each other. While the Jihadists inflict upon the innocent their crude, barbaric and self-centered retribution and the recognized nations of the world continue business as usual as a more subtle approach to the same end, targeting other human beings as one's prey for personal gain will fuel the unrest and bitterness throughout this planet ad infinitum.

It is not really a matter of the United Nations being flawed or incompetent. The organization and the members it represents never sincerely intended to achieve the goals contained in any mission statement. It was merely a convenient method to appear concerned and open another channel for pursuing their original objectives; to rise above the competing nations for a superior position in the world. And the game continues unabated.

Burma's Military Government Appoints Commission to Draft Constitution
By VOA News
18 October 2007

Burma's military government says it has appointed a committee tasked with drafting the country's constitution.

State media Thursday report the 54-member committee will be chaired by Chief Justice Aung Toe.

The move is another step in the military government's so-called "road map" to democracy that it says will lead to elections in the future.

The guidelines for a new charter were decided during 14 years of talks that ended in September. The party of detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi was not a participant in those talks and the guidelines bar her from holding office.

The U.S. State Department Thursday reproached the Burmese government for failing to halt its crackdown, release political prisoners, or open a dialogue with its political opponents.

Burmese state media claim the government is still holding nearly 380 people arrested in the crackdown on protesters.

Separately, the U.N. World Food Program reports that an estimated five million people in Burma, or roughly 10 percent of its population, are on the verge of starvation.

Earlier today, the United Nations envoy to Burma, Ibrahim Gambari, suggested that international powers give Burma incentives to let it know that the world is not just there to punish its military rulers.

Gambari is in Jakarta as part of an Asian tour aimed at increasing pressure on Burma's government after its bloody crackdown on pro-democracy protests last month.

Gambari says he will make his next trip to Burma around mid-November, or earlier, if possible.

He hopes to meet with Burma's top military leader, General Than Shwe, and detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi during the visit.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Another United Nations Failure Report

2007-10-18T21:38:00.000-07:00

In August and September there were posts here on the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. Recent reports indicate October will not pass without another reminder of expected failure. The first report features a conference on a popular topic of UN media releases; stories about women and children. Women's issues are a staple subject for the UN. This particular conference is about maternal health. 20 years of maternal health publicity and 15 years of Millennium fantasies are not producing results.

Maternal Health Conference Opens in London
By Tendai Maphosa
London
18 October 2007

A three-day conference on ways to reduce preventable deaths of newborns and women during pregnancy has opened in London. Tendai Maphosa has more for VOA from London.

The Women Deliver Conference has attracted about 2,000 delegates, including politicians from Africa and Asia, heads of U.N. agencies, health professionals, human rights activists, and faith groups from 75 countries.

The conference kicks off amid concern that Millennium Development Goal Five, which aims to improve maternal health, may not be achieved. The target set by the United Nations is to reduce maternal mortality by 75 percent between 1990 and 2015.

The UN's MD goals are failing on other fronts as well. There are often statements referenced in articles like the one below that imply the UN relies on 'raising awareness' as if no one realizes there are issues that need to be resolved. Which can lead one to the obvious conclusion all these campaigns are a scam.

Most Countries Making Slow Progress Resolving World Hunger Crisis
By Rosanne Skirble
Washington, DC
18 October 2007

In 2000, leaders from 189 countries adopted a United Nations plan to cut extreme poverty and hunger. The U.N. Millennium Development goals aimed, by 2015, to cut hunger in half and child mortality by two-thirds.

Uruguay, Peru and the Fiji Islands have also done relatively well, but according to the Index most countries will not reach the U.N. Millennium targets if progress continues at current rates.

There were three other examples of the UN doing nothing but making unnecessary statements. It has become so commonplace it is as if they are in a trance and do it automatically. Likewise the public seems quite prepared to ignore them. The member countries are under no pressure to honor the stated mission of the United Nations and so things continue to languish. Any progress made can be credited to others with no legitimate reason for the UN to exist.

UN Chief Urges Iraqis to Promote National Reconciliation

UN: North Korean Flood Victims Need Emergency Aid

UN Official Says Millions Go Hungry in Burma Despite Vast Agricultural Resources

And if you are following the story in Burma, while a tragic situation, it presents a typical UN response to crisis within the world. The public pleadings of the UN may only help the culprits of each crisis. By now perpetrators worldwide must be aware of how to manipulate the UN's own practices to further their sinister ambitions. You can expect further empty statements, urgings and meaningless proclamations from the United Nations.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

sources:
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-10-18-voa32.cfm
http://www.voanews.com/english/Science/2007-10-18-voa15.cfm
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-10-18-voa27.cfm
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-10-18-voa50.cfm
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-10-18-voa51.cfm

Shocker: UN Tsunami Corruption

2007-10-18T14:38:00.000-07:00

I was preparing a comedic post full of parodical sarcasm, but this isn't even funny anymore:

TSUNAMI reconstruction funds worth $US500 million are being lost to fraud and corruption because of the failure by the United Nations to implement its own anti-fraud measures.

This claim is made by the UN's former deputy director of investigations, Frank Montil, a former ASIO officer who for a decade was the deputy director of the UN's internal watchdog unit, set up to investigate fraud and corruption within the UN and its agencies.

In an exclusive interview with the Herald, Mr Montil said "the oil-for-food scandal taught them nothing". The fraud and corruption which had been occurring during the tsunami reconstruction period would come back to haunt the UN, which had wilfully ignored all the warning signs.

Press clips and blogs everywhere reveal UN ineffectiveness, incompetence, and corruption

2007-10-18T13:58:00.001-07:00

Just a small part of the sorry record:

Kofi Annan retires in style: Kofi's Candy Box
Embarrassing nukes in Syria, hamhanded coverup: UN document confirms Israel hit Syrian nuclear reactor? Update: UN caught redacting document; Update: It was a translation error, claims UN
Kosovo 'peacekeeping' failure, 2007: Bomb scare prompts UN to evacuate staff from Kosovo headquarters
Kosovo 'peacekeeping' failure, 2006: Calm, Quiet Kosovo
al Qaeda gets a free rein in Kosovo: Ex-Security Chief Blows Whistle on UN's Kosovo Mission
Kickbacks to Cambodian judges paid with UN funds: Phanari: Iran Update (see final paragraph)

For a little comic relief:

Second Life Blogs: Protesting the Virtual United Nations

With cyborg kangaroos, no less. FTA:

"My biggest objection to the UN," he tells me, walking toward me through the Grand Hall chamber-- himself a kangaroo in a black matte robe similar to what Neo wore in The Matrix Reloaded-- "is that it's a corrupt organization that is trying to disguise itself as peacekeeps whose only concern is the well-being of all people everywere. A good example of this is the 'Oil For Food' scandal."
But why not leave the fabled Hear No Evil/See No Evil/Speak No Evil monkey statues, instead of, well, robot kangaroos?
"[T]o represent the potential for great power, danger, and corruption, wrapped in a warm and fuzzy package," Thorn tells me.
Oh.

Interview with John Bolton at RWN

2007-10-15T19:02:00.000-07:00

John Hawkins of Right Wing News interviewed former UN ambassador John Bolton. Here's a taste:

Hawkins:

Some... would like to see the United States pull out of the UN altogether. Do you think that would be a good idea? Why or why not?

Bolton:

I understand why people favor withdrawing, because it's so frustrating; it's ineffective, and it runs contrary to American interests and policies in many respects. But, I think being realistic, I think there are occasions when it can be useful as an instrument of American foreign policy and many of our friends and allies do rely on it and that's kind of a fact of life as well.

So, I think we need to have massive change in the way the UN operates and I would move the US away from mandatory or assessed financial contributions toward a system of voluntary contributions, but I think we shouldn't have any illusions about what the UN can accomplish. And, I certainly don't think we should limit or constrain American policy to only what we can get the UN to support.

Hawkins:

The United Nations comes across as a fundamentally anti-American and anti-Semitic organization. Do you think that's true and can you tell us a little bit about why that's the case?

Bolton:

Well, I think there is a lot of anti-American and anti-Israeli feeling in New York, but the UN is never going to be better than the geo-political reality in the world as a whole. But frequently, it's worse than that, because of the culture that develops in the various UN cities and especially in New York. People think that they can create facts on the ground by causing a fuss at the UN and as long as we react as if they really can succeed, they'll try and do it. So, I think you have to have a realistic and very skeptical view of the tempest in the teapot that boils up from time to time in New York and ... recognize that much of it is simply theater, and that's all.

Read the whole thing.

Russian UN diplomat gets 4 years for bribery.

2007-10-12T14:58:00.000-07:00

Oil for Food and a bribing mood.

A Russian diplomat who once chaired a U.N. budget committee was sentenced on Friday to more than four years in prison for helping launder more than $300,000 in bribes and taking a share of the money.

Vladimir Kuznetsov, 50, was found guilty in March of a single count of money laundering in a case that grew out of a criminal investigation into corruption into the now-defunct $64 billion humanitarian oil-for-food program for Iraq.

U.S. District Judge Deborah Batts sentenced Kuznetsov to 51 months in prison and fined him more than $73,000.

Needless to say, Russia is crying foul over his arrest and treatment. Pot, Kettle...

Cross-posted at Free Constitution

Down with the Law of the Sea Treaty!

2007-10-10T04:16:00.001-07:00

From the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) Teleconference:

Posted by 1389

Efforts to prevent the sovereignty undermining Law of the Sea Treaty from taking effect continue.

The main website is http://www.rejectLost.org. You can also read about this bad treaty at the Vigilant Freedom Blog (http://www.vigilantfreedom.org/910blog/2007/10/02/356/):

Why does LOST present such a threat to United States sovereignty?
Here are a few of the many problems with the treaty:
LOST would give the United Nations power over US interests. The UN's multilateral agencies and bureaucrats cannot be trusted to oversee or administer 70% of the world's surface covered by its oceans.
LOST could set alarming precedents for the international control of other" international commons" such as Outer Space or the Internet
LOST would give the United Nations its long sought power of taxation, using taxes on seabed mining to fund its Anti-American activities.
LOST encourages China's and Russia's aggressive territorial claims to oceans.
LOST could subject the U.S. to decisions enforced by activist American judges, importing foreign or perhaps even "international" law into the courtroom, or perhaps even a UN Navy...

For more information, listen to Center for Security Policy's Frank Gaffney speak with bloggers about Lost here: http://www.vigilantfreedom.org/audio/LOST_briefing_9-26-07.wma, and read this piece by the Investor's Business Daily discussing LOST: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275613778444636.

The International Community Needs a Conscience

2007-10-07T08:07:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

More than one month ago continued reports of trouble in Burma were in the press, Protesting Continues in Burma Despite Crackdown. About the same President Bush issued preliminary comments, Bush Urges Burma to Stop Intimidating Citizens , that may have served as a warning shot accross the bow. The next report, US, Indonesia Urge China, India to Press Burma , may have overdone the warning theme and similar to other nation's impotent responses suggest with or without the United Nations there is little in the way of peer pressure on the international stage.

An almost unnoticed statement from the UN, UN Human Rights Chief Voices Concern About Violations In DRC, Iran and Burma , demonstrates the useless rhetoric that appears to be the norm in these situations and likewise the norm of those who warrant the verbal chastisement to ignore the warning. It all seems to choreographed as if all the participants share the guilt equally.

The second and third week of September witnessed a dramatic decrease in world chatter over the worsening crisis in Burma. But in the third week with most officials having no excuse to be unaware of the problem a convenient event also provided no excuse for an organized response by the UN, World Leaders Address UN General Assembly. The members were already together for other business and it lasted until October 3rd, UN General Assembly Annual Debate Concludes , with over 100 heads of state ignoring the Burma problem as it continued to develop.

ASEAN Under Pressure to Press Burma Against Violence, 'Burma's neighbors worried military's crackdown on protesters, which began Wednesday, could lead to massive bloodshed.' That was the 26th of September and as recently as late August it was not a secret that trouble was brewing in Burma that would probably require international intervention. The headlines below illuminate the days leading up to the military violence against Burmese citizens.

Bush Announces New Sanctions on Burma
US to Increase Sanctions Against Burma; Protests Continue in Rangoon
Burma Threatens Action Against Protesting Monks
Thousands of Burmese Join Monks in Massive Protest

On the day the violence erupted, US, EU Ask UN to Consider New Burma Sanctions, while the response was, UN Security Council Urges Restraint Against Burmese Protesters. as if the crisis had just begun but the truth is, Burma Crackdown Condemned, but Not Unexpected. While the Bush Administration may be able to state they did something, US Condemns Burmese Military, Imposes Sanctions , most of the world's nations are guilty of adopting the common UN-like approach, Burma's Neighbors in SE Asia Express 'Revulsion' Over Crackdown. Expressing reactions or sentiments rather than taking decisive action capable of forcing an end to the violence is simply wrong.

Long about the beginning of October, a senior envoy from the UN spends three or more days in Burma, gets snubbed by General Shwe, wastes time with photo ops with Burma's leading dissenter who has been under house arrest for a long time and then heads back to report to the UN. Then the US sends an envoy describing her style as a no nonsense approach. As of this writing the results of that effort are not known. What is known is the latest UN response to the Burmese crisis.

UN Envoy Warns Burma of Serious International Consequences
US Warns Of Sanctions If Burma Does Not Cooperate With International Community
Global Protests Against Burma off to Slow Start, but Burma Shows Conciliatory Signs

And as of October 7th, Crackdown Continues in Burma, Diplomatic Debate Rages Abroad
How lame and predictable is all of this?

Did Iran Blink?

2007-10-03T17:51:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

There is little that is more entertaining than to watch representatives
of a state sponsor of terrorism like Iran act so innocent in light of
previous statements that the holocaust never happened and they intend
to destroy Israel. Not to mention the default Islamofascist creed
bent on killing all infidels which also includes other Muslims they
don't like.

The sad part of the recent appearance of the Iranian President at
Columbia University beyond the obvious was the number of closet
liberals in the media tripping over themselves to attend a dinner with
him. Not understanding that they may be the only ones in the
world who actually believe their claim of doing it all in the name of
journalism. So much so that their automatic defense of simply
mentioning the first amendment is no longer presented with a supporting
argument.

Whether the Iranian President was too busy trying to fool other
audiences this week or simply bored with the easy prey in American
media and academia, the second errand boy has made his presence
known. The Iranian foreign minister is currently attempting to
give foreign policy mentoring to the Whitehouse and State
Department. The worn out complaint of American saber rattling
coupled with a plea for cooperation rather than confrontation is
another amateur ploy looking for a gullible audience.

With the advent of changing politics in France, the former opposition
from the French as well as Germans, Russians and others at the United
Nations may be altering course. A brief pause until November to
put in place stronger sanctions against Iran on the nukes issue may be
evidence of a difficult transition to pro American attitudes, the
simple realization that Iran is an excessive risk with nukes or
reluctance of some to agree with the US on Iran.

But the French Foreign Minister has annoyed Iran by hinting at the
threat of war if they continue to act like Saddam on nukes. While
he backpedaled slightly after tension was raised, Iran may be less sure
than their words indicate when stating the US is not in a position to
deal with them militarily. While some pundits claim air strikes
against Iran are not a viable option and the out of control public
comments on the Iraq war suggest the US is not prepared to put more
boots on the ground anywhere, the options available may not be so
limited. It is fair to say one reason Iran makes these claims is
to convince themselves or their population that the US will not resort
to air strikes. And changing attitudes toward Iran from other
nations may be enough to convince Iran to comply with international
demands.

And this post ends with a comment on an Iranian university inviting
President Bush to attend a question and answer session.
Presumably to reciprocate for the Columbia University fiasco. The
White House Press Secretary Dana Perino indicated the invitation was
not taken seriously. Let's just say in addition to the nearly
impossible security requirements there is no real upside to honoring
such a request. It is doubtful minds would be changed and
determining whether the invitation is based on genuine interest or
merely another ploy of the Iranian government will not take
place. But there is some humor in the story.

Iran's Foreign Minister Says US Threats Not Helpful to Resolving Nuclear Issue
By Margaret Besheer
United Nations
03 October 2007
Besheer report - Download (mp3) 671k
Listen to Besheer report

Iran Summons French Diplomat To Protest Kouchner Comments
By VOA News
03 October 2007

Iranian University Invites Bush to Speak
By VOA News
02 October 2007

Toothless UN Wastes 3 Days in Burma

2007-10-01T11:32:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

There are numerous methods of communication these days. Borrowing
the common terms 'instant' and 'messaging' demonstrate in words what is
possible. For business, government and consumer use each form of
communication matches up with customary standards or protocols for
formal and informal exchanges of dialogue or data transmission.

Does it occur to anyone else that the passing of two or three days
since a representative from the United Nations arrived in Burma/Myanmar
is more than enough time to produce a 'sit down' between the rep and
General Than Shwe? And if the UN rep is merely
waiting for this General to agree to a discussion then it proves again
nothing about the United Nations is united or serving a useful
purpose. This would be the point in an interview where a
spokesperson for the UN would tell the interviewer there are
established guidelines for attempts at intervention. God knows
the UN spends nearly all of its time and other people's money issuing
statements and generating documents of limited value like guidelines.

As far as a chronology of the UN 'senior envoy' and his exploits in
Burma over the last three days, reports from the VOA are a handy
reference.

UN Envoy in Burma to Try to Mediate Burmese Protests
By Luis Ramirez
Bangkok
29 September 2007

Ramirez report (mp3) - Download 697k
Listen to Ramirez report (mp3)

United Nations special envoy Ibrahim Gambari has arrived in Burma on
what the U.N. secretary-general calls an "urgent mission" to broker
negotiations between the military government and the pro-democracy
opposition. VOA's Luis Ramirez at our Southeast Asia bureau in Bangkok
reports the visit comes as the army is tightening its control over
demonstrations in the main city, Rangoon.

UN Envoy Meets With Aung San Suu Kyi and Military Junta
By Nancy-Amelia Collins
Jakarta
30 September 2007

Collins report (mp3) - download 485K
Listen to Collins report (mp3)

The United Nation's special envoy to Burma has met with detained
opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and with members of Burma's ruling
military junta to try to stop the its violent crackdown on
pro-democracy demonstrators. Ibrahim Gambari has extended his
mission in Burma - canceling a planned flight to Singapore and vowing
to meet with Burma's top junta leader, Senior General Than Shwe. VOA's
Nancy-Amelia Collins in Jakarta has more.

UN Envoy Remains in Burma, Pledges to Meet With Top Junta Leader
By VOA News
01 October 2007

A senior United Nations envoy has extended his mission in Burma in the
hopes of meeting the country's top military leader, Senior General Than
Shwe.

Officials say Ibrahim Gambari has returned to Burma's new capital,
Naypyidaw, for the second time in three days to try to ease a deadly
military crackdown on pro-democracy protesters.

This is exactly the type of incident that requires quick action to stop
senseless killing in a country that has lost its ability to maintain
any civil or military order without violence spiraling out of
control. How many times must this scenario be repeated before
members of the United Nations step up and proclaim a set of
international rules to end a crisis like this shortly after it
begins? Without any improvements in the process, each time an
incident occurs its outcome will be no better than any previous
one. There is no need for an organization that can do no better
than this.

Burma or Myanmar: That's not the question

2007-09-30T09:04:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

In late August of this year the Myanmar (Burma) military government released a list of names of activists they wanted to apprehend. About the same time the US and UN voiced objections to the treatment of detained activists and the Myanmar government's treatment of protesters in general. The UN had asked for the activists to be released based on reports of torture and a hunger strike. During the same week the government closed the gathering that was intended to produce the country's constitution to be voted on by the public. The 40 year rule by the military government appears to be flexing their muscle by quieting public dissent and abandoning any attempts at reforms even if they are only symbolic in nature. The country has toyed with the idea of a constitution for 14 years.

The US State Department expressed the requisite displeasure with Myanmar's constitutional efforts characterizing them as a sham. The same day a rights group was demanding aid for a jailed activist whose was described as suffering a broken leg during arrest. The following day President Bush criticized Myanmar for their treatment of 'peaceful' protesters calling it 'inexcusable.' At this point in this narrative you may have the impression the protesters or activists plight was serious and international efforts to resolve the problems were not. You would be correct. And it continues.

During the first week of September 2007 monks in Myanmar continued their protest. This was met with a continued crackdown by the Myanmar government which was naturally followed by more verbal protests from various sources around the globe. Near the end of the week the Myanmar government released a wounded protester, sentenced six others to prison terms up to 28 years while the protests continued. The impressive response from the international community was for the US and Indonesia to urge China and India to pressure Myanmar to straighten things out.

The following week, mid-September, the United Nations issues a declaration on Indigenous Rights while the UN Human Rights chief, imagine this, expresses concern over human rights violations in the Congo, Iran and Burma. This former UN war crimes prosecutor is characterized as 'expressing dismay' of the Myanmar reactions to protesters as well as problems in other countries. The 47 member panel is going to review records of violations. Do any practical, timely and effective solutions ever come out of the United Nations? On their own, UN member countries display a disturbing habit of inaction, including the US. Perhaps an obligation of membership in the UN should require all countries to act in concert to halt outrageous events like those in Myanmar. Even with understandable obstacles to such action, if all member countries acted as one, a single member country would likely concede to adequate international pressure and at least cease further escalation until satisfactory solutions could be arranged. It is certainly worth a try and would be an improvement over lame expressions of disappointment.

Of course after the lame expressions of disappointment were delivered by the UN in mid-September, the Myanmar government was reported to urge the protesters to cease their activities against the 'junta' while the protesters asked for international intervention for their plight. By this time six weeks had expired since the Myanmar government had released the names of activists they wanted to collect.

By the third week of September the monks in Myanmar had stepped up protests and encouraged the public to join them in opposing the military. One report indicated 10,000 monks were involved in the marches in Rangoon. The government warned of retaliation and initiated curfews as the US increased sanctions against Myanmar.

By now most people are aware of the violence that followed in Myanmar in the past week. The exiled citizens providing reports and assistance with the flow of information in and out of Myanmar may have been temporarily inconvenienced by the government shutdown of internet access. Wireless communications may have allowed information to continue unimpeded. The most dramatic tragedy of the week was the slain reporter which was caught on video and freely displayed. In light of the escalation of violence more needed attention is drawn to the conflict. Not necessarily by coincidence, a UN representative has traveled to Myanmar to speak with both sides. How encouraging.

Whether you acknowledge the name Burma or Myanmar, that's not the question. How the international community handles their mission though the United Nations is. The source for this post was numerous reports from Voice of America who toether with the BBC was criticized by the Burma/Myanmar 'junta' government as propagandists. Reason enough to use them as a source.

A-mad-jihadist's speech to the UN

2007-09-25T16:44:00.000-07:00

Blah blah blah, evil Zionists and imperialists, blah blah blah, class-warfare crap, blah blah blah, poor downtrodden Iran, blah blah blah, "imagine all the people living" under the love and peace of Islam when the Madi returns to earth. Woo hoo, woo hoo hoo......imagine.

Yeah right - get out the burkhas, strap bombs to your kids, cut out your women's clitorises and start piling up stones.

What a bunch of nonsense. Of course all the other aggrieved poor downtrodden barbarians in the UN will take it seriously.

I understand why the UN has become what it is. It is a way to defuse the barbarians' anger and resentment of the West; give the barbarians fancy titles and keep them talking so that they don't do anything worse. The problem is that the UN, like socialism, is a hypocritical leftist idea, a band-aid put on the suppurating sore of the barbarians' wealth and power envy. It hasn't worked. It won't work and it's time for all civilized people to stand up and call a spade an spade and tell the barbarians to go home and get their own houses in order before dictating to civilized people.

I'm not a white supremacist but I'm definitely a western civilization supremacist. It's time to send the UN packing and stop giving the barbarians an arena in which to vent their irrational grievances.

Posted by Patrick Joubert Conlon

The UN, GW and Abandoning Scrutiny

2007-09-24T06:24:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

It is doubtful the United Nations ever misses an opportunity to work
the crowd and the media. If you are green or a tree hugger or a
charter member of PETA (another op for Alicia Silverstone to disrobe)
one can only suspect you are ecstatic over news of the UN Global
Warming Summit. The rest of us may not be so sure. Not
unlike the group of scientists who hold a different view of the issue
than is played relentlessly in the MSM.

17,200 Scientists Dispute Global Warming

Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny

World scientists meet on global warming
But many top scientists reject the new figures...

This post does not accept nor reject the idea of global warming.
But that is the whole point. While the global warming issue was
raised near a fever pitch in anticipation of the IPCC report on global
warming, the first question that should have entered your mind is who
the hell is the IPCC and what credentials do they have to support the
assumed credibility of their findings?

Many surprising supporters of the idea of man-made global warming are
very large corporations. Those announcements were followed by the
skeptics wondering what financial incentive they had to cause the
voluntary participation in fighting a demon on which we have too much
or too little information. Please withhold your criticism as it
should be repeated again, this post does not accept nor reject the
notion of global warming. But if one is the least bit skeptical
or cynical of mass approval or rejection of any idea, this would be a
good candidate for suspicious motives. For instance, if you have
been on the planet long enough to remember the push for alternative
fuels and energy conservation and other environmental issues from
thirty or more years ago, the lack of enthusiasm then and over
decades since should be sufficient to alert your radar. Something
may be wrong here.

Leaders Gather for UN Climate Change Meeting
By Phuong Tran
Dakar
23 September 2007
Tran report (mp3) - Download 596k
Listen to Tran report (mp3)

Heads of states from more than 80 countries are gathering in New York
City for what will be the largest U.N.-organized event for world
leaders on climate change. This is a preliminary meeting to work toward
a new international agreement on the issue. But scientists say places
like sub-Saharan Africa need more than just an agreement to really fix
the problem. Phuong Tran has more from VOA's West and Central Africa
Bureau in Dakar.

The IPCC who provided the grand report on global warming earlier this
year that renewed the discussion and raised to that fever pitch is part
of the United Nations. How convenient is that? One of the
reports listed at the top of the page suggests not all the panel
members are scientists and those who voiced objection to the report
were deleted from the publication. While that assessment seems a
little over the top, the same sort of accusation in reverse was leveled
at the Bush Administration earlier this year. So who knows?
Again, that is the whole point. What do we really know?

If that question sounds absurd to you in light of recent developments
you may want to consider how absurd it would be to act on all the
recommendations if there are flaws in the data. Any undertaking
this massive and 'global' requires more scrutiny than everyday decision
making.

Schwarzenegger, Gore add star power to climate meet
By Deborah Zabarenko, Environment Correspondent
Mon Sep 24, 1:10 AM ET

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Vice President Al Gore
are set to join world leaders for a U.N. meeting on Monday aimed at
spurring global negotiations on how to cool a warming planet.

Schwarzenegger, a former bodybuilder and movie star who has pushed for
environmental reforms in California, acknowledged that rich and poor
countries have differing responsibilities when it comes to global
warming, but said it is time to stop the blame game.

The report above certainly does not help. Part of the problem is
when those with celebrity status fail to measure the undo influence of
their public positions on critical issues. To take an absolute position
rejecting any alternative viewpoints is dangerous even if combined with
altruistic intentions. This may be another case of asking the
right questions. Could a former actor and current governor of the
state of California and a former VP who lost his only attempt at
becoming President have any other motives for their respective stands
on global warming? It is no different than asking if major
corporations have jumped on the GW bandwagon to launch profitable new
businesses that will cater to the environmental panic?

However, if you have not settled on a position for this issue and are
more alarmed about potential panic and half-baked solutions than the
idea of global warming itself, take heart. The article below
aside from announcing some new agreement on HCFC elimination mentions
the beginning of that organized effort as 1987. The inefficiency
and time lag of all such initiatives is as staggering as the number of
issue-based organizations in existence. Whether man-made global
warming is a legitimate issue or not, there is better than even odds
that solutions won't be timely in either case.

'Historic' deal reached on cutting ozone threats
by Philippe SauvagnarguesSat Sep 22, 10:19 PM ET

Nearly 200 countries have agreed to accelerate the elimination of
chemicals that threaten the ozone and exacerbate global warming, the
United Nations Environmental Program announced Saturday.

UNEP chief Achim Steiner hailed the agreement by governments to move
forward bans on dangerous hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) as a "vital
signal" in efforts to slow climate change and welcomed China's
willingness to back the deal.

"It is perhaps the most important breakthrough in an international
environment negotiation process for at least five or six years,"
Steiner said.

And one can only guess at why President Bush has changed his views on
the subject. But the more compelling fact about the article below
is there always seems to be a media story about those clamoring for
attention pointing their collective fingers at the US.

U.N. climate chief urges U.S. action
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP
Sat Sep 22, 1:53 PM ET

The Bush administration has made a "significant" shift on global
warming, but still falls short on the "much more aggressive" policies
needed to head off its damaging impact, the U.N. climate chief said
Saturday.

"It's very clear that we're not on track," Yvo de Boer told The
Associated Press.

More than 70 presidents and prime ministers and 80 other national
representatives are gathering here for Monday's U.N. "climate summit."

To emphasize once more that this post does not accept nor reject the
idea of global warming is attached to the final thought expressing the
need to subject the global warming issue to strict and continuous
scrutiny befitting any other scientific endeavor. This is one of
those times when embracing the flat earth or the sun revolving around
the earth would not only be embarrassing but entirely counterproductive
not to mention a colossal mistake.

Were Nations Ever United?

2007-09-13T18:01:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Every now and then an absolutely classic example of what is wrong with the United Nations emerges. This is not only a criticism aimed at the UN but at least one former employee (featured in the story) and voices from around the world who take pleasure in complaining about the United States.

If the US is not being characterized as a saber rattling bully interfering in the affairs of other nations it is being accused of indifference or reluctance to intervene on behalf of the cherry picked victims of the week in the media's latest scoop.

Who the hell is Stephen Lewis and where does he get off laying blame on others. For someone who worked for the UN, he should know better than most of the total lack of genuine concern within that organization. A major point of such a group of nations should be to bring pressure to bear on those in the international community who allow situations described by Lewis.

IDS Activist Accuses UN, Western Nations of Ignoring Congo Sexual Abuse
By Nick Wadhams
Nairobi
13 September 2007

Wadhams report (mp3) - download 610K audio clip
Listen to Wadhams report (mp3) audio clip

The chairman of an anti-AIDS group has accused the U.N. Security Council and the West in general for ignoring what he calls a litany of horror against women in eastern Congo. For VOA, Nick Wadhams has the story from Nariobi

In a blistering statement, Stephen Lewis, a former U.N. envoy on AIDS in Africa, said sexual violence against women and girls is endemic in the eastern region of the Democratic Republic of Congo, where millions of people are still suffering from the aftershocks of years of civil war and unrest.

He cited thousands of rapes each month, as well as torture and killings by militias, and the miserable funding of limited health care in eastern Congo. While the crisis in Sudan's Darfur province has received attention from both the U.N. and Hollywood stars, the plight of women in eastern Congo has been largely ignored despite numerous reports, journalist accounts, and visits by diplomats.

"The entire world is preoccupied with Darfur, understandably," Lewis said. "But it must be said that between ten and twenty times of the number of people have died in the eastern Congo as have died in Darfur. There are more displaced persons in the eastern Congo than in Darfur. Darfur has been going on for four years, the eastern Congo has been ravaged for ten. And nowhere on this planet is there such a holocaust of horror visited on women and girls."

Lewis, who is Canadian, heads his own foundation which works to fight the spread of AIDS across Africa. He spoke after a trip to the region. His comments came days after the U.N. emergency relief coordinator, John Holmes, relayed similar concerns after visiting Congo.

Some analysts fear that Congo is on the brink of a new civil war. Tens of thousands of people have fled the east in recent months because of fighting between government forces and various militias that have taken shelter there.

Lewis said the ongoing violence against Congolese women, including sexual assault and murder, proves how badly the U.N. has failed to confront the country's problems. He said U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon must press the International Criminal Court to declare rape a crime against humanity and indict suspected war criminals on charges of committing it.

"Neither the United Nations nor the international community has the faintest idea what to do about the catastrophe for women in the Congo," Lewis said. "Where the Congo is concerned, all the Security Council is really concerned about, as evidenced in their most recent discussions, is questions of troop numbers, arms embargoes and sanctions. Rape is not on the agenda."

Lewis argues that the world's leaders, mostly men, have applied what he called a "spectacular lack of energy" in ending the abuse of women in Congo. He suggests it is time these men turned to women to solve the problem.

Ahmadinejad protest at UN Headquarters, NYC

2007-09-13T13:33:00.000-07:00

From Cristy Li:

The Jewish Community is planning and organizing a rally on the 24 September to protest the visit to the United Nations of Iranian President Ahmadinejad

The rally scheduled for the 24 September opposite the United Nations, will protest Ahmadinejad statements about his Holocaust denials and belligerence towards Israel and the United States. The conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish organizations and the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York are sponsoring the event in cooperation with the United Jewish Communities, UJA Federation of New York and Jewish Council for Public Affairs.

Iranian President Ahmadinejad will be in NYC to speak before the opening session of the U.N. General Assembly.

The UN and China's Military Budget

2007-09-06T22:24:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

These days it is naive to use phrases like ' since the Cold War ended.' So the Soviet Union had a name change and Chairman Mao is not the leader of 'Red China'. Beyond that, other details may have changed but the situation is hardly much different than it was since the end of WWII and the late eighties.

The US and Russia competed for allies during the Cold War to maintain a balance of power throughout the world. The fortunes of Third World countries since then has in some cases improved dramatically. One obvious change since the seventies, even before the assumed end to the Cold War, is the relationship between Iran and the US. And the former Soviet Bloc and relationships with Russia have also been altered. But what about larger countries like China? How have things changed for them?

In terms of military matters and international games countries play, China's actions mirror those of Cold War history. Over the last couple of weeks reports indicate other members of the United Nations have encouraged China to be more forthcoming about military expenditures. The reports state China has not presented such information in a decade. Being cynical, how much value can such information have? Both sides of the discussion characterize past data as being basic. And it is also noted by groups who monitor such things that some countries provide detailed data while others,including China, only present a minimum of detail.

What is known, as in other similar news reports, suggests China has developed strong ties with countries like Sudan and Iran. Most of their arms exports go to these and other countries. Just like the Cold War that is supposed to be over, the current actions of countries throughout the world have much in common with those previous practices. The recent agreements over nuclear technology between the US and India raised questions of concern. Similarly, China's exports raise the same questions.

While there are rules at the UN for reporting on conventional weapons, the concern that China's testing program may be an attempt to weaponize space would not likely include conventional arms. Besides, how realistic is the expectation of full disclosure among nations regarding arms? Just another example of the pointless nature of the United Nations. Weapons disclosure among nations based on the honor system is a silly notion.

China to report military spending to UN
By ANITA CHANG, AP
Sun Sep 2, 6:45 PM ET
China said Sunday it will provide the United Nations with information on its military spending and arms deals for the first time in more than a decade, taking a step to address international concerns about the secrecy surrounding its defense spending and operations.

China promises more military transparency
Sun Sep 2, 7:37 AM ET
China said Sunday it will begin reporting its armed forces budget to the United Nations and rejoin a global register of conventional arms amid foreign pressure for greater military transparency.

China said the moves were meant to show the world its commitment to military transparency, at a time when its massive armed forces expansion is causing alarm bells to ring in Asia and further afield.

Is Zimbabwe an Example of UN Success?

2007-09-01T09:28:00.001-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

The UN's Millennium Development Goals program includes topics claimed to address basic problems worldwide such as hunger and poverty. Currently, the program is about halfway through its schedule to accomplish the goals. Based on how benchmarks are designed and appraised there is plenty of room for argument on what has or has not been accomplished. It is the opinion of the author of this post that the UN's MDG are nothing more than a proclamation of grandiose plans intended to justify the existence of this impotent international organization.

Today's installment focuses on one country in Africa. There was no special formula or criteria used to select today's featured country. It was more a matter of what was readily available and being covered by various news sources at the time of this writing.

The country is Zimbabwe. Whether or not this country is typical or common in terms of the obstacles that face any attempt to improve conditions for people around the world is unknown. But certainly this example cries out for recognition as evidence supporting the fact that UN policies toward problem solving are fundamentally flawed.

It is ironic that Robert Mugabe came to power in Zimbabwe in 1980 which is the same year the now failing water supply infrastructure was installed. One of Magabe's recent moves (July 2007) was to force businesses to slash prices on products like wide-screen TV's. Hurry folks, you can get 'em for about 20 pounds. In a country with a 20,000% inflation rate and the economic crisis Mugabe blames on business that is trying to undermine his government, cars are also going for the incredible price of 30 pounds.

Even though economists weighed in on the situation, it doesn't require a financial genius to understand the stupidity of this move by Mugabe. It is also not surprising that this country's leader has been subject to criticism for most of the time he has been in power.

The insanity in contrasts between the problems faced by Zimbabwe, the solutions offered and apparent mixture of priorities demonstrated by the following news accounts reinforce the notion that the UN Millennium Development Goals are either naive in their simplistic approach to problem solving or believe the rest of us are.

Infrastructure problems would be expected as a problem in nations suffering from the ills of ineffective or corrupt governments. As mentioned earlier, the water supply infrastructure in Zimbabwe is seriously inadequate. Frequent interruptions to the supply of water as well as electricity are cited as primary influences in the economic crisis within Zimbabwe. The municipal control of the water supply being transferred to a national authority has not improved the situation. Failure to provide adequate water for the needs of the population creates obvious risks.

Another result of Zimbabwe's economic crisis has been a flood of two or three million refugees to neighboring the neighboring countries of Zambia, Mozambique and South Africa. There has been some question of how South Africa will handle the swell of mostly illegal immigrants. About one week ago, the UN in their wisdom had stated there is a plan for responding to the refugee situation but no mandate is in place to intervene. This suggests the UN's grand MDG has no realistic solutions either. Is this not exactly the kind of problem the UN should be capable of resolving?

While Mugabe continues to express his position that the West is trying to bring about regime change, infrastructure problems with water and electric power have created another crisis. People have resorted to using wood to fill the void for cooking requirements. This has resulted in devastation to Zimbabwe's forests. The power failures have also caused problems for irrigation and a reduction in the food supply. Go figure, the UN will be looked to for supplying food to more than a third of the population through next April's harvest. So much for the MDG hunger program as it relates to Zimbabwe. Rather than fewer hungry people it appears as there will be more.

No crisis would be complete without headlines suggesting an opposition leader to Mugabe's government is involved in actions that will impede progress in 'crisis talks.' Perhaps this is an area the UN may have previously been expected to participate in and direct other UN member to provide incentives for resolution. The membership of the UN as well as government leadership in struggling nations can be viewed as the central obstacles to problem solving. It would be no surprise that those in positions of authority do not share the concerns of ordinary citizens within troubled nations. If that is the case, how can the UN be a catalyst for improving conditions for the less fortunate throughout the world?

While this next story does not address the MDG primary education goals directly, it offers some insight to the difficulties of education in troubled nations as well as an example of another aid complaint that has targeted the US as not doing enough. Who can hope for the promise of education in areas where basic human needs are in crisis? Must those issues be solved before education can truly help? A tiny fraction of the funds provided by the US recently paid for one week's training for Zimbabwe teachers to be instructed on how to teach 'life skills' as a deterrent to the spread of HIV/AIDS. For a mere $500,000 of aid, or about $40 per day, 1500 teachers attended the training for a week. Considering the difficulties presently faced by Zimbabwe, the wisdom of this activity is suspect.

The final story provided for contrast in this post deals with a topic that by luck of the draw was available as a current example of what makes little sense in the scheme of things. There is a Zimbabwe film festival celebrating its 10th anniversary this year. The usual descriptions and hype for such an event are expressed in the article. But to the outside observer, relying only on media reports, it serves as another reason to ask what the hell goes on in places in the world that seem to be consumed by strife? People cannot eat, attend to common tasks, are exiting the country by the millions and yet there is demand for a film festival. Not that anyone in Zimbabwe should be denied an opportunity to develop whatever skills they can, but doesn't this seem out of place?

Certainly we discuss similar contrasts in the US. The United States is not exempt from bizarre combinations of circumstances featuring the over privileged and underprivileged. It is not expected that these same situations would not be present in other countries.

The central question for this post is how does the UN reconcile public opinion about its operations? It appears they don't as their activities continue to demonstrate peculiar responses to chronic problems. More statements, more research, more monitoring, more appeals for funding and excuses for performance that never seem to solve anything is what maintains a less than positive public opinion of the United Nations.

Zimbabwe's problems may be generally representative of nations throughout the world requiring international attention and resolution. Perhaps the UN could spend some of the funding used for communication to explain why its members cannot see their way clear to negotiate effectively with countries around the world like Zimbabwe. Even if one country at a time, the United Nations should be able to rally members to solve problems of poverty, hunger, disease, etc., without the hype and suspicious characteristics of projects like the Millennium Development Goals. The solutions to these problems do not require all the sophisticated and complex arrangements often described by the UN and related organizations.

sources:
Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe strongman
Mugabe's price cuts bring cheap TVs today, new crisis tomorrow
Water Shortages Make Every Day Life A Struggle In Zimbabwe's Cities
Zimbabweans Fleeing Economic Collapse Not Refugees - UN Agency
South Africa Mulls New Response To Massive Zimbabwean Immigration
Zimbabwe Economic Crisis Wipes Out Forests
Harare Says Tsvangirai's Australia Contacts Jeopardize Crisis Talks
Zimbabwean Teachers To Instruct Life Skills To Avoid HIV Infection
Zimbabwe Film Festival Celebrates a Decade in Cinema

UN and WMD

2007-08-30T12:02:00.000-07:00

According to the UN's IAEA, Iran is making progress, producing less nuclear fuel potentially easing suspicions of any WMD program.

In other news, the UN was found to have WMD in the New York City Headquarters.

via Instapundit.

UN MDG: Millennium Development Grifters

2007-08-24T15:56:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

This is another attempt to pierce the veil of secrecy covering details of the UN's Millennium Development Goals and the missing proof of concept or simple accountability for claims made of this program's success to date. A review of the UN 2007 Report on the MDG displays pretty charts and figures one is obviously expected to believe. Any discussion of this program is rather quiet and it is likely you will not hear much about it unless actively searching for answers and even then useful data is hard to obtain.

For instance, the UN MDG uses PPP or purchasing power parity as a numeric cutoff to define the buying power of those considered in extreme poverty. The first goal of the MDG is to eradicate poverty and hunger. However, a closer look at documents other than the initial publications indicates the goal is really to 'halve' whatever level of poverty existed when the program started. The current PPP of $1.08 is based on data from the World Bank and with just that much information it is quite useless for the general public, not to mention those in extreme poverty and hunger. In one of the reports it suggests that the level of those facing extreme poverty and hunger decreased from 1.25 billion in 1990 to 980 million in 2004. Another piece of information that is totally useless to the average reader. Aside from the obvious reasons, those figure are useless since the MDG program started in 1999 or 2000 and the figures include many years in which the program did not exist. Plus, there is no addressing whether or not birth and death rates were taken into account. As morbid as that may seem, if a person is dead they cannot reasonably be considered to have been lifted up beyond hunger and poverty.

That was a rather lengthy description of part of what is wrong with the MDG. But alas, this post is not the only source of criticism toward the Millennium Development Goals. After much searching, one lone source was unearthed today. Included in someone's paper on the subject was criticism of the measuring process with regard to the MDG. It is focused on medical aspects of the goals but nonetheless concludes that any meaningful data will not result from the way the UN measures goal results. And one response to the paper is enlightening as to the motives behind the MDG as well.

The following is the paper's author on goals, measurement and problems with the data.

Viewed objectively, it must be agreed that the MDGs palter. The health goals for 2015 sound quantitative, but for most of them, their quantification is irretrievably flawed. The trends that the health goals allude to are either immeasurable or were not measured properly from the 1990 baseline year onward. This is not an extraordinarily controversial conclusion: recall that in each of the cautionary examples discussed—malaria, maternal mortality, and TB—the UN's own current or former staff have said that the trends are immeasurable or lack baseline data.
Short of abandoning the MDGs, the better option is to amend the goals, targets, or indicators—all three levels of the hierarchy—to be feasibly measurable.
Unfortunately, the UN leadership has, to date, delayed this option. In a September 2004 memo, one year ahead of the Millennium +5 Summit, the UN's Deputy Secretary General instructed the organisation's experts in charge of the MDG statistics with the following:
The [Millennium +5 Summit]…should not be distracted by arguments over the measurement of the MDGs—or worse, over different numbers being used by different agencies for the same indicator…. [P]roposals for modifications of definitions or new indicators will only be considered formally after the [Millennium +5 Summit]… as any changes at this stage would only distract from the result that we would like to achieve. [3]

And below is the author's description of a peer review of his paper. But the interesting part is the reviewer's opinion of what the MDG are. It nay even be the words of someone working for an NGO.

Some may disagree with my emphasis on measurement and timelines. One anonymous peer reviewer of this paper wrote that while measuring the MDGs is “of concern for epidemiologists and others”, my interpretation “misses the point” because the purpose of the MDGs is merely to be exhortatory. “The MDGs are not a measuring exercise”, wrote the reviewer, but instead are a “common vision of what matters most for improving the lives of people in poor countries”.

It is always refreshing (NOT) to have someone who is not suffering from extreme poverty and hunger express what matters most to people who are. It should be clear to anyone reading this that independently determining the value or lack of value in just one of the MDG goals requires an excessive amount of research. That only serves to make the point that the UN is missing a key element in their Millennium Development Goals. Readily available proof of results in a form understood by the general public would provide some credibility to an organization plagued by suspicion.

There is currently no reasonable way to tell if anyone is better off because of the Millennium Development Goals program. The only thing to be sure of is UN representatives will continue to hound the world for more money while some of us continue to question and criticize the UN.

Iran -UN World Conference against Racism.

2007-08-24T05:29:00.000-07:00

Yaakov Lappin for YNet News:

Despite its numerous calls for Israel's destruction, and repeated denials of the Holocaust, Iran has been selected by the United Nations for a leading position in a committee that will plan the 2009 UN World Conference against Racism.

The planning committee, which will meet for the first time in Geneva on August 27, will be made up of an inner circle of 20 UN member-states, to be headed by Libya.

The decision to include Iran in the committee has been slammed by UN watchdogs. "As a UN spokesperson against racism, Iran will invert totally the message and mission of the United Nations," Anne Bayefsky, senior editor of the New York-based Eye on the UN, said in a press release.

"Iran is now poised to wrap itself in a UN flag as a lead agent of the next global conference against racism, Durban II," she added, referring to the 2001 UN conference on racism held in Durban, South Africa, which saw unprecedented levels of anti-Zionist rhetoric and calls for Israel's destruction.

Speaking to Ynetnews, Bayefsky said that "the leading exponents of anti-Semitism, whether directed at Jews individually or the Jewish people and its state generally, continue to be provided a global platform at the UN. This is but one example of a broader phenomenon."

"Eye on the UN has found that in 2006 the UN system as a whole directed the most condemnations for human rights abuses against specific states - first towards Israel and fourth towards the United States. Iran was lower down on the list of UN human rights concerns," Bayefsky said, adding: "And yet the US taxpayer continues to pay a quarter of the bill for activities which demonize Americans and Israelis on a global scale."

You could not make it up. Only yesterday we had this report on 25-year-old Saeed Ghanbari in the Daily Mail who was given 80 lashes by an Iranian court it was reported he had been convicted of abusing alcohol and having sex outside of marriage.

Daily Mail report: Man flogged by Iranian court as people watch.
Cross posted at The Lone Voice

The UN's MDG Campaign

2007-08-16T08:16:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Sometimes thoughts arrive in such a torrent when researching a post it makes it difficult to follow the plan. This is one of those times. The easy part is browsing for a suitable topic about the UN. It should be something useful for anyone reading the post. If it relates to a recent event some effort should be made not to duplicate the effort of others. The item of interest was found early. The Millennium Development Goals appeared and after a half hour of reading too many questions arose not to choose this topic.

Like most United Nations projects or initiatives an abundance of material is available. Most will no doubt contain fluffy accounts of progress and an appeal to the readers emotions to convert them to an advocate. The documents and other media reviewed today cannot be adequately presented in one post. Looks like a series may have been born. This post will be limited to an introduction.

You might get the impression that whatever the Millennium Development Goals are they are somehow connected to the year 2000. You would be right. According to UN docs, they are currently half way to the deadline for completing the goals. All the world's countries agreed to this plan as well as all the world's development institutions. There are eight goals. Reading the goals is the part that begins to raise the questions. Then the idea of half the time being gone and half left leading to the natural instinct to wonder how much has been completed.

The stated goals were read and the torrent of thoughts began. All the thoughts were questions. The wording of the first goal was question number one. Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger is the first goal listed and right away the word 'extreme' jumped out. How easy will it be to define whatever they get done, if anything, as extreme? Leaving anything they don't get done as less than extreme. A little too critical of the UN? Do you really think they are above such a cheap stunt? If you do, please explain why they use the word extreme. Why not just use some fixed amount like eradicating hunger or poverty in country A, B and C for example. You get the point. It leaves an escape from responsibility for completing a task that is not precisely defined.

The second goal of achieving universal primary education may be tougher to abuse. But what does the 'achieving' part mean? Is all they are saying is it will be available and the same for everyone who participates? Or are they saying what most would accept as implicit? That every human on the planet gets a primary education. And the question of defining primary in this case won't be asked yet.

The remaining six goals only feature the last one as being likely to see completion. Promoting gender equality is not something that really begins or ends and neither is the other part of empowering women. Does saving one person from an early death before adulthood qualify as reducing child mortality? Who would be surprised if something that ridiculous was offered as an explanation after a UN failure? Improving maternal health, combating disease and ensuring environmental sustainability (the global warming game) are worded as empty as the earlier goals. But you can probably bet they will finish the last one. Develop a global partnership for development is the last and only goal that is nearly guaranteed to be completed. For the UN is little more than a global partnership for manipulating the people of the world on a grand international level. Trading the world's future at the expense of the world's citizens.

Skeptical, cynical, mistrusting and pessimistic is a natural response to the United Nations and its activities based on many previous outcomes. Like many other processes on the planet, members of the UN have put together a PR machine that excels in redefining diplomacy, statesmanship and other principles for achieving the trade offs necessary to reach agreements with other nations. All the members get a piece of the pie while the original concept has been abandoned except as a tool for press releases.

The first attempt to determine the status of the Millennium Development Goals began with agriculture. A link from the UN (and there are many) connected to the World Bank. Go figure. A somewhat impressive Flash presentation was to show the status on many things. The first item checked was hunger. An illustrated, interactive map displayed the map of the world color coded for % of hunger of children. The highest color code was 30% and up (infinity). The incremental code ended at the bottom with a color indicating no data. The map had many countries with the color code for no data. Two especially surprising countries to be uncounted were Canada and India. Canada because the population is about 10% of that in the US. And India because it may have the 2nd largest population in the world. Halfway through the project and there is no data?

More details as well as helpful sources will be offered in the next post. Perhaps less narrative and more mind numbing statistics will be presented. Okay, maybe not. The thoughts are still coming in torrents. The scale and quantity of possible misdeeds and disappointments that will come from this UN sponsored activity is really what numbs the mind; not the statistics.

Victory at Risk: The UN in Iraq

2007-08-10T11:22:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

In spite of all the efforts of those not directly involved in the war
in Iraq to facilitate a failure by aiding the enemy or favoring
surrender, their has been much positive news presented in recent weeks.
The antiwar, peacenik, surrender at any cost crowd may be in for a rude
awakening as a result of the incredible commitment of the United States
military.

That is why news of possible re-involvement of the United Nations in
Iraq is a bit troubling. While those opposed to victory in Iraq
will attribute UN member opposition to military force in Iraq to the
flawed intel and other mistakes leading up to the war, that would be
putting the horse in front of the cart. The opposition was for
different reasons and the intel flaws were not determined or presented
until after the war began. The reasons for the opposition had
more to do with arrangements with Saddam Hussein by those expressing
opposition to enforcing UN resolutions. The primary reason for
opposition presented by the left in the US had little to do with any
antiwar philosophy. That excuse was used by liberal politicians
to inflame the antiwar segment of the public to cover the failures of
the Clinton Administration. Had Clinton successfully addressed
the Saddam Hussein problem during his Administration, the problem would
not have been left for President Bush.

News reports indicate President Bush and Prime Minister Brown are in
favor of this new UN involvement. Some sources report there are
clerics and others associated with various groups in Iraq who prefer
discussion with the UN rather than with American or British
leaders or representatives. Perhaps that preference is based on
insistence from the United States, Britain and others that the new
Iraqi government is dragging its feet in forging solutions among its
members. The recent defections from the government and its
members' summer vacation are examples of a complacent attitude.

Which brings this discussion to the conclusion to be drawn in this
post. There may be some truth in all the talk of a need for a
political solution in Iraq. But not for the reasons often
given. Just as Democrats have conceded a victory in Iraq would be
a problem for them, the same may be true of members of the new Iraqi
government as well as previous opposition from members of the UN.

The trade, economic or financial scams initiated by Saddam Hussein with
certain UN member countries was the real motive behind opposition to US
enforcement of UN resolutions. The Democratic party's political
agenda was the real motive behind opposing the war in Iraq. And
the failure of the new Iraqi government to solve their problems in a
timely manner can be explained by the selfish motives of members who
stand to gain by prolonging sectarian violence.

If the continued success of current military operations in Iraq provide
enough positive news in September to thwart efforts of the contrived
opposition, victory in the Iraq war may be at hand. But the
question remains whether current plans for UN intervention will
jeopardize the current success. Members of the Iraqi government
who prefer UN intervention may only see it as a way of prolonging the
conflict. While the real reason the US and Britain express
support for the UN may in fact be a concession. T(hat offering may
develop into an Achilles heel for victory.

(SOURCES)

UN Security Council to vote on Iraq mission

UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - The UN Security Council was expected to vote on
Friday on a resolution to expand the United Nations role in Iraq,
diplomats said.

U.N. council to vote on Iraq resolution

By EDITH M. LEDERER, AP

UNITED NATIONS - U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said a resolution
that would expand the U.N. mandate in Iraq will internationalize the
effort to assist Iraqis in overcoming their internal differences and
bringing neighboring countries together to help the country.

U.N. to
have expanded political role in Iraq

By Patrick Worsnip

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United Nations will see its role in Iraq
expanded to include seeking reconciliation between warring factions and
dialogue with neighboring countries under a Security Council resolution
planned for Friday.

Blue Dogs barking

For the first time during 110th Congress, the Blue Dog Coalition — a
47-member grouping of self-described moderate and conservative
Democrats — defied House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic
leadership on a critical national security issue: Saturday night's vote
on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), where 41 dissident
Democrats, nearly all of them Blue Dogs, provided the margin of victory
for President Bush on the issue of terrorist surveillance.

Clyburn: Petraeus Report May Split Dems

On its website, the Washington Post reports House Majority Whip James
Clyburn said "a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq" by Gen.
David Petraeus "likely would split Democrats in the House and impede
his party's efforts to press for a timetable to end the war." Clyburn,
in an interview with the washingtonpost.com video program PostTalk,
"said Democrats might be wise to wait for the Petraeus report,
scheduled to be delivered in September, before charting [their] next
steps." Clyburn noted that Petraeus "carries significant weight among
the 47 members of the Blue Dog caucus in the House, a group of moderate
to conservative Democrats," and "without their support...Democratic
leaders would find it virtually impossible to pass legislation setting
a timetable for withdrawal."

Split in anti-war left

By Manu Raju

August 08, 2007

Congress’s failure to secure a timetable for withdrawing American
troops from Iraq has split anti-war activists on the tactical question
of whether to attack Democrats, who now control Capitol Hill.

The split has also underlined accusations among some activists that
MoveOn has abandoned its credentials as an issue-based advocacy group
and now instead provides cover for Democratic Party leaders.

Opinion: The Turn

William Kristol Mon Aug 6, 11:13 AM ET

Washington (The Weekly Standard) Vol. 012, Issue 45 - 8/13/2007 - Hot
July brings cooling showers, / Apricots and gillyflowers, as Sara
Coleridge's doggerel has it. But for the American antiwar movement,
this July brought only a cold drizzle, wilted blossoms, and bitter
fruit.

For the Iraq war's opponents, July began as a month of hope. It ended
in retreat. It began with Democratic unity in proclaiming the
inevitability of American defeat. It ended with respected military
analysts--Democrats, no less!--reporting that the situation on the
ground had improved, and that the war might be winnable..

Thugs Gone Wild at the UN

2007-08-03T11:18:00.001-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Ban Ki Moon, the current Secretary General of the UN who follows Kofi Annan in that role has presented both contrast and similarities to his predecessor. At face value, his suggestion that all countries should be treated equally with regard to human rights policies is fair and should be an obvious conclusion to draw for reasonable people. If the Islamic Council had not criticized him for the remarks with accusations of taking sides, this would have been just another press item from the United Nations. Without the noise from the Islamic Council, Moon's remarks would have resembled the style of Annan by overstating the obvious. Moon's subtle insinuation was detected by this story's antagonists.

The excerpt and video below provide a dramatic presentation of the situation and further explain what most already know. Some of the nation's in the UN are deflecting attention from their abusive policies by pointing their fingers at Israel as the sole target of a scheme to shift guilt.

UN Watch Briefing
Analysis and Commentary from UN Watch in Geneva
July 11, 2007 — Issue 163
New Video: UN Human Rights Council Members—In Their Own Words

At its recent June 2007 session, the UN Human Rights Council concluded its lengthy reform process by voting, first, to drop Belarus and Cuba from its blacklist. New restrictions were imposed on the independent experts who report on country violations. The ability to introduce resolutions that name abusers was curbed. And Israel was singled out for permanent indictment—subjected to the council's sole agenda item on a specific country, and to the sole investigation that examines only one side, presumes guilt in advance, and is immune from review.

The Human Rights Council of the United Nations has been under fire since its inception. This year is no different. The report below is from the UN's own documents and is a brief insight to another flawed initiative from an organization that continues to give new reasons why there is another meaning to the name United Nations. Just in what and how are they united? Can the world really afford to continue these sham activities? What can this sort of behavior ever solve? There are essentially rhetorical questions.

Fourteen nations elected to serve on UN Human Rights Council
17 May 2007 – Fourteen countries have been elected to serve on the United Nations Human Rights Council after two rounds of balloting among Member States today at UN Headquarters in New York.

Angola, Bolivia, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Qatar, Slovenia and South Africa were successful after the first round of voting, while Bosnia and Herzegovina and Italy were chosen following a second round.

Here is a response from the other side of the issue.

Ki-Moon Criticized Over Israel
by Marc Shoffman - Thursday 2nd August 2007
Muslim states in the United Nations Human Rights Council have been criticized after attacking UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for sticking up for Israel.

Pakistan, speaking on behalf of the UN’s 57-strong Organization of the Islamic Conference at a UN meeting last Wednesday, attacked Ki-Moon after he said it was unfair to single out Israel for permanent review.

Ban said all countries should be treated equally after a resolution by the Council last June which put Israel’s human rights conduct under permanent review while failing to name any other countries.
(click to read the rest)

An excerpt from a recent speech by Ban Ki Moon demonstrates both his similarities and contrasts to Annan. The contrast is another reference to some truth about the UN while his other statements sound like Annan in his limp defense of the United Nations.

Unfortunately over the last six decades, even though the United Nations has been promoting human rights, peace and development, it has not enjoyed proper appreciation.

Polls show that two thirds of Americans think the United Nations is doing a poor job. Yet these same polls show that even larger majorities (74 per cent, to be exact) believe the United Nations should play a larger role in the world –- whether intervening to prevent genocide or aggressively investigating human rights abuses. An equally healthy percentage of Americans believe that the nation’s foreign policy should be conducted in partnership with the United Nations. (Read the full report) CLICK

Even the Secretary General points to data showing that two out of three Americans look unfavorably towards the United Nations. He may have misinterpreted the 74% figure. Perhaps three out of four Americans answered the way they did indicating the UN does little if anything to fulfill its obligations. Do something!!! That may be the real sentiment of those represented in the poll.

But Moon should get some credit for his remarks about human rights and how all countries should be treated equally. Yet nosing in to US affairs regarding incarceration of illegal aliens and allowing the Human Rights Council and the Islamic Council to conspire against others, especially in such blatant fashion, should be quelled. So his remarks may have been just another empty PR task from an empty leader. To be fair, more time should pass before judging this individual. But all experience and history thus far suggests a low probability of any improvements

Even the recent activity with distributing peace keeping forces around the world has more chance of causing more sexual abuse cases than resolving conflict. The UN must successfully string together a number of significant, positive accomplishments that can withstand global scrutiny before any optimism can be displayed.

UN Offers No Solution for Taiwan

2007-07-25T04:27:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

The United Nations is experiencing difficulty in making new friends. This week the UN denied Taiwan's application for membership to the United Nations. Taiwan has been regularly applying for membership and been continuously denied for the last fourteen years. While Taiwan and Mainland China parted company after a civil war in 1949, the relationship or connection between them has been disputed since. It would be fair to say that Taiwan views itself as independent while China does not. The opinions of other countries may be more a matter of international politics than their honest assessment of any sovereign status, if known.

In a press release from the website of the Government Information Office, Republic of China (Taiwan), officials reference their right for UN membership, in part, based on the UN's Charter Preamble. The UN's ideal of equality for mankind is one argument Taiwan employs to justify their right to membership. They cite China's interference and the UN violating its own principles of universal membership

Taiwan insists they qualify for membership and 3/4 of their population favors membership in international organizations. Their is a summary of Taiwan's economic ranking, successes and strengths. The remainder of the points made are probably subject to challenge which may explain some of the difficulty in gaining membership. And Taiwan appears to be interested in taking advantage of some benefits of membership as well as contributing their particular expertise to the international community. The references to this point were provided by the GIO of Taiwan.

After searching the UN website for an extended period of time, nothing on the subject was found. That may explain why the AP report specified their information came from the Chinese language version of the UN's internet presence. The AP report indicates Taiwan was expelled from the UN in 1971 based on a resolution recognizing the People's Republic of China as legal owner of a seat at the UN.

Both China and the United States as well as other UN members have an ugly history in this lengthy dispute. The civil war mentioned earlier featured prominent historical figures such as Mao Tse-Tung (Mao Zedung), Chiang Kai-shek and George Marshall of the famed Marshall Plan. Mao and Chiang were leaders of the opposing sides in the civil war and Marshall brokered a peace deal that later failed with Mao victorious in the civil war and Chiang fleeing to Taiwan.

There were several resolutions in 1971 on questions of who gets to keep the seat at the UN. Part of the chronology from and account at Wikipedia indicates the civil war never ended and that Taiwan is a rebel government. One resolution indicates the US offered an arrangement where People's Republic of China and Taiwan retain membership. It is outside the scope of this post to attempt to draw a conclusion on such a muddy, complicated chronology of events. It would not be out of the realm of possibilities to assume there was a great deal of questionable international politics at play resulting in the outcome. It is also possible that Taiwan's intentions are not completely innocent. And there are suggestions that China would attack Taiwan if it attempts a move to independence.

This post is simply intended to add to the chronicle of the UN and the pointless exercise that it is. As mentioned by the GIO of Taiwan, the UN's own charter claims to offer universal membership and to treat all nations equally. That hardly seems to be the case here although it is not the only denial of membership on record. But there is no indication the UN offered any reason for the rejection. Taiwan contends the application should be discussed by the General Assembly but the Secretary General simply returned the application without comment.

Even if all involved are masking their true intentions the fact remains the noble ideas and intentions presented to justify the UN's existence have never been realized. And there is no evidence to support they ever will. This is merely political and public relations cover for the typical maneuvers that take place between nations of the world. The promise of the UN is about as empty as WWI being called the war to end all wars.

The UN Peacekeeping Oxymoron

2007-07-18T18:12:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

All the pretense associated with the United Nations is not lost on the plethora of naming conventions for committees, groups and delegations, etc., or the quagmire of documentation chronicling the abundance of meetings, conferences, proposals, recommendations, reports and other tasks to cloud a history of inaction.

This may sound familiar or even redundant but needs to be emphasized to counter the UN's practice of covering their mistakes, corruption and misdeeds an infinite PR campaign. This situation might get more exposure if the member nations were dissatisfied or outraged by the subtle, arrogant and criminal negligence involved. But then they would need to admit their obstruction of justice or complicity in the scheme.

The chosen topic for this post is a comparison between media reports of UN personnel involved in criminal behavior that has been largely overlooked or ignored and even subject to cover up by this international organization and the predictable empty response from the General Assembly this week.

Another committee from the UN has approved proposals and recommendations for standards of conduct of the peacekeeping forces at the UN. It is a draft resolution to eliminate future sexual abuse and exploitation by members of the peacekeeping forces. This will be included in a memorandum of understanding between the UN and member nations who supply the forces. Aside from this bringing to mind the fox guarding the chicken coop, what possible effect can a memo have to member nations supplying troops if the troops have already proven their disregard for maintaining their conduct to common sense and normal moral codes of behavior?

Here are some example reports of the types of crimes and length of time without any known corrective action or criminal proceedings. Feel free to comment or complain about the research of this post if you have information about such remedies. Here are the example reports:

ABC News: 2/10/05: U.N. Sex Crimes in Congo
The range of sexual abuse includes reported rapes of young Congolese girls by U.N. troops; an Internet pedophile ring run from Congo by Didier Bourguet, ...
abcnews.go.com/2020/UnitedNations/story?id=489306&page=1

UN 'ignored' abuse at Kosovo mental homes | Special reports ...
UN 'ignored' abuse at Kosovo mental homes. Oliver Burkeman in New York Thursday August 8, 2002 The Guardian. Patients at United Nations mental institutions ...
www.guardian.co.uk/Kosovo/Story/0,2763,770954,00.html

U.N. Finally Forced to Probe Its Pedophilia Scandal
In the meantime, U.N. agencies and many of the NGOs were busy at work putting in place new checks and balances in the field to prevent sexual abuse of ...
www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/5/6/151901.shtml

As you can see, these reports are from 2002 and 2005. It is the middle of 2007 and the UN has finally approved a draft resolution for a memo to the troops to behave themselves. That must be welcome comfort to the victims of the abuse. Does this indicate Un peacekeeping forces are made up of mindless thugs with no conscience? Do they just round up a group of criminals to have their way with largely defenseless victims? These are essentially rhetorical questions based on the information provided.

Here is an excerpt from the press release of the UN this week. To read it will require that you restrain the natural tendency to choke the life out of someone who rightly deserves it. That this organization can continue to operate with such total disregard for every principle they were intended to maintain is beyond understanding. Here's the excerpt:

By further provisions of the revised memorandum of understanding, United Nations peacekeeping personnel, accorded certain privileges and immunities arranged through agreements negotiated between the United Nations and host country solely for the purpose of discharging peacekeeping duties, agree, among other things, to: conduct themselves in a professional and disciplined manner at all times; respect local laws, customs and practices; treat host country inhabitants with respect, courtesy and consideration; and act with impartiality, integrity and tact and report all acts involving sexual exploitation and abuse. They also agree to encourage proper conduct among fellow peacekeeping personnel and to properly account for all money and property assigned to them as mission members.

Later in the document there is mention of establishing another group that may consider providing assistance to the victims of their own troops from member nations. But there is no mention of criminal proceedings against the perpetrators.

If you feel the need or have the time, mention this story and/or others like it to your elected representatives the next chance you get. This is one time when I would not expect much response. But it will give you a profound indication of the gravity of the situation. Media accounts, investigative reports, public comments and other measures have rolled off the backs of officials that could do something. But this is how it is done at the United Nations. This entity needs to be eliminated. It serves no purpose for which it was intended. More later after some time to recover from the disgust this generates. Thanks for reading.

United Nations: Iraqi children less safe than a year ago

2007-07-16T09:50:00.000-07:00

By Todd Anthony
http://rightisright.squarespace.com

According to Dan Toole, director of Emergency Programs for the United Nations Children’s Fun, “"Children today are much worse off than they were a year ago, and they certainly are worse off than they were three years ago."

Indirectly, that MUST be the fault of the United States, right?

Toole added that “Iraqis no longer have safe access to a government-funded food basket, established under Saddam Hussein to deal with international sanctions.”

I read this Associated Post report and couldn’t help but laugh. While no one is claiming that Iraqi is a modern day Babylonian utopia, would Iraqi civilians rather live under the Hussein regime?

Furthermore, taking the violence into account, let’s play the blame game for a second. Who is responsible for the current situation in Iraq?

Naturally, it HAS to be America’s fault right and its poor post-war prosecution, as well as the weak-willed defeatists on the Left?

Or is it the Nouri al-Maliki government, which has allowed cronyism and sectarian differences grossly interfere with running a credible?

Or could it be that the problem lies with the Iraqi people themselves for their failure to put aside ethnic and religious differences and take advantage of an extraordinary opportunity to forge a new, democratic Iraqi.

Sadly, while the first two reasons contribute to Iraqi state of affairs, the third reason very much belies lack of progress throughout the Muslim world. It is this incessant xenophobia that grips Muslim countries and produces terrorism. This fear of differing opinions has the mosques in its clutches.

This report clearly trumpets the “successful Oil-for-Food” program administered between 1991 and 2003. What the report fails to mention is the gross overindulgences of the Saddam government and the corruption that plagued the United Nations in its dealings with Saddam.

Toole adds the following, “Apart from shortages of items such as milk and baby milk formula, ‘the basic Iraqi food basket was fairly secure under the regime because there was food coming in and the government provided the food basket to its citizens.’”

Nevermind that children in general desperately require milk as a source for protein and calcium, other facets of the food program worked well, other than the random kidnappings, torture, and killings that occurred endlessly for those deemed to be political dissidents or anti-Baathist.

Aside from the Oil-for-Food program’s basic operations, the program essentially suffered from widespread corruption and abuse. For example, Benon Sevan, the program’s primary caretaker, refused to allow review and investigation into the program. He also stated that illegal payoff complaints should be formally filed with the whistleblower’s country of origin. As a result, Iraq could bar anyone who filed a report. Finally, Sevan ordered the shredded of several years worth of documentation.

Ultimately, an American-backed investigation, led by Paul Volcker, revealed that profits were used to curry favor with the UN and Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Also, Sevan had accepted over a hundred thousand dollars win bribes. That report and as well as other media reports concluded that 15,000 revealed a litany of individuals and programs that received oil sale contracts through the program, including several European outfits.

Perhaps before the United Nations publishes any Iraqi report it claims as facts, it needs to preface any such report describing its down-right criminal role in the Oil-for-Food program.

Coupled with its almost-inept positions in Darfur and Iran, does the United Nations really have ANY credibility? Or rather, is it more a Left-leaning institution completely unsuited to handle 21st century issues?

Nations United by Empty Promise

2007-07-11T01:36:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

In their own words from information on their own site, the United Nations once again proves their incompetence or arrogance that borders on criminal negligence. If an organization allows itself to be characterized as an international effort to which all member nations contribute on behalf of the world's citizens, why does it fail to accomplish goals of any substance in pursuit of world peace, human rights and the like?

It is because they have taken bureaucracy to a level never before seen in human history. The most common headlines in the world press regarding the UN feature phrases like, 'the UN calls for' or 'the UN urges' or 'the UN discusses' or other impotent and meaningless statements. All member nations are to some degree complicit in this sham organization's conspiracy to commit fraud. While there may be individuals at the UN with good intentions and impressive skill sets for such endeavors, blame can be shared by all if you subscribe to the notion if you are not part of the solution, your are part of the problem.

A brief trip through the UN's own chronology of progress on reforms in 2006 will help illustrate these points. The key problems and habitual UN responses to a needed action are in bold type.

November 9

The Secretary-General’s High Level Panel on UN System-wide Coherence in the areas of Development, Humanitarian Assistance and the Environment delivers its report “delivering as One” to the General Assembly with far-reaching proposals for a more unified, coherent UN structure at the country level.

October

The Secretariat issues the “United Nations Secretariat First Consolidated Report 2005”, covering both financial and programme information for the year 2005, and is a first step in improving Secretariat reporting to the Member States.

20 July

In resolution 59/283, the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General to form a panel of external, independent experts to review and redesign the United Nations administration of justice system. The “Justice Redesign Panel” subsequently submitted comprehensive and far-reaching proposals for a new model for resolving staff grievances.

10 July

The Steering Committee for the “Comprehensive Review of Governance and Oversight with the UN and its Funds, Programmes, and Specialized Agencies” submits its 2005 World Summit-mandated review to the Secretary-General.

7 July

The General Assembly, in response to the Secretary-General’s 7 March report, decided to approve a modest package of reforms granting the Secretary-General limited budgetary discretion, approving the creation of a Chief Information Technology Officer and endorsing, in principle, the development of a Enterprise Resource Planning system for the Organization.

2 May

The Secretary-General presented his report “Uniting Against Terrorism” (A/60/825). This report presents elements for a counter-terrorism strategy as presented in Madrid in March 2005.

May

The General Assembly elected the first 47 members of the new Human Rights Council. While the new membership has drawn criticism from some critics as “old wine in new bottles,” the reformed election procedures (GA vote and absolute majority) were effective in dissuading some countries from running and provided a greater degree of transparency.

10 April

More stringent guidelines on financial disclosure and declaration of interests issued, designed to include more senior managers, procurement officers, and those who invest the assets of the organization.

3 April

Human Rights Council established, designed to allow for a more rigorous implementation and monitoring of human rights, replacing the Human Rights Commission.

30 March

A report entitled “Mandating and delivering: analysis and recommendations to facilitate the review of mandates” is issued following the General Assembly’s request for a review of mandates older than five years.

22 March

A policy on the “Acceptance of Pro Bono Goods and Services” is introduced for the purpose of preventing conflicts of interests with service providers and contractors in the context of the organization accepting free offers of support to various humanitarian, peacekeeping, and other UN operations.

7 March

The Secretary-General, in response to the request contained in the Outcome Document from the member states, presents his management report “Investing in the United Nations: for a stronger Organisation worldwide” containing 22 far-reaching reform proposals.

1 January Ethics Office begins operations, responsible for managing and overseeing the new Whistleblower protection and revised financial disclosure policies, as well as the development of Ethics training programmes for staff.

As you can see, that is just great. Reports, panels, guidelines, elections, policies and more reports, panels, guidelines, elections and policies. Where is the performance? Where are the results? The Middle East is still as it was. Darfur is still in turmoil. Terrorist groups are still active. People are still starving. Africa still languishes in conflict and disaster. Where is their one success that can be attributed to the UN? If you know of one, kindly inform the rest of us as there appears to be little indication of reform at the UN changing anything or any evidence of a significant contribution by any action originating from the United Nations.

The United Nations is nothing more than a platform for member nations to, at best, feign concern and, at worst, conspire to manipulate common diplomatic tricks and international funds in pursuit of multinational agendas. Many look to governments to cure ills in the world with public funds. The UN maintains, supports and advances that fallacy. All the while enriching the lives of its participants and ignoring the 'global community' it claims to serve.

China Hides Intentions Behind UN

2007-07-06T08:02:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

There is reason to believe that Russian President Vladimir Putin longs for the days when they were an undisputed superpower. The recent strain with President Bush over missile defense in Europe and the former Soviet Bloc may just be another symptom that relations between the two countries are not well. Ending up on opposite sides of most arguments at the UN at least signal vastly different international objectives. But that may pale in comparison to the maneuvering of China and their use of the UN and 'diplomatic' efforts in regard to the hostile positions of Iran.

China urges diplomacy on Iran standoff
By EDITH M. LEDERER, AP
Tue Jul 3, 6:49 PM ET

UNITED NATIONS - China called Tuesday for stepped up diplomacy rather than new sanctions to try to persuade Iran to suspend uranium enrichment and rein in its nuclear program.
U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya spoke after the United States started discussions on a third round of tougher sanctions against Iran for refusing to freeze enrichment and China's opposition signaled a tough fight ahead in the Security Council for Washington and its European allies.

Well of course China prefers meaningless negotiations with a country quite comfortable ignoring demands from the international community that they cease their nuclear ambitions and agree to oversight by outside sources. The concern over China's thirst for oil as well as major economic expansion with nearly the same disregard of complaints as that shown by Iran are well founded. China as well as India are feverishly working out energy arrangements with Iran. Iran is in no position to ignore these overtures as their infrastructure and other internal problems are straining their economy and social stability. Just the kind of stress that has preceded other world conflicts resulting in war.

This pattern did not just develop. Here's a little reference on the subject from several years ago.

China and India wrestling for Iran's oil
Last Updated(Beijing Time):2004-11-22 09:12
As the fight between China and Japan and that between China and Vietnam for petroleum is still pending, India, a future big oil consumer, is competing with China for oil supply from the Middle East, especially Iran, which is beyond the control of the U.S.

And the opinions on the topic are showing no significant change while answers to solve these problems are long in coming. Perhaps some of the world's usual suspects for conflict and tension should understand they are not the only game in town.

Developing Asian nations pose an even greater challenge for U.S. efforts to isolate Iran. Both the China National Petroleum Corporation and the China National Offshore Oil Corporation recently announced plans to develop major liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects, respectively in South Pars and in North Pars. China's other major oil company, Sinopec, hopes to develop the Yadavaran oil field, which is expected to produce 300,000 barrels a day by 2010.
The most concerning news comes out of India, a country that is actually helping Iran alleviate its gasoline problem. It not only supplies some 15 percent of Iran's gasoline imports, but an Indian business conglomerate, the Essar group, is negotiating the construction of a 300,000 barrel per day refinery in southern Iran. Two years ago, New Delhi also signed a $40 billion LNG deal with Iran. India's domestic natural gas supply meets barely half its demand. Iran, which is geographically close to India, is a natural supplier. Tehran, which now wants to become India's exclusive natural gas supplier, is pushing for the construction of a $7 billion gas pipeline deal that would connect the two countries via Pakistan. This would make one billion Indians dependent upon one of the world's most radical regimes.
(source)

Other nations in world beyond Iran, India and China may find opposing the US and its efforts in foreign affairs are not really in their own best interests. If they believe the US is difficult to deal with they may be sorely surprised at the new found arrogance of the three just mentioned. It seems most reports go out of their way to ignore these particular implications.

The UN and Friends Are Never Satisfied

2007-06-08T08:44:00.000-07:00

This press release really needs no explanation. But to be helpful, let me just express a comment or two. If there is any validity to the UN statement that this $60 Billion gift from the G8 is 1/3 of what is needed over the next five years, what is wrong with getting 2 1/2 years worth of funds from an annual event?

And if this press release is right and a 'plan' is missing, then what are you doing with the money?

The fact that the US is contributing 1/2 of the money mentioned will 'buy' the US no applause. Last year the US provided almost 3/4 of a Trillion dollars in private donations to charity around the world. And many countries claim we're the bad guys. All I have to say is the UN, the authors of this press release, people like Bono and his ilk, plus the countries that complain about what the US does to contribute, have a lot of nerve complaining. What is anyone else doing that is so grand?

Pardon me, but from time to time the frustration of how things are done in this world deserve the occasional rant.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

G8 Leaders Promise $60 Billion, One-Third of Global Need

A Real Plan to Defeat AIDS & Drug Resistant TB is Still Missing

WASHINGTON, June 8 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The G8 leaders today
promised an increase in investment in programs to fight AIDS, tuberculosis
and malaria, but the $60 billion total will still be only one-third of what
the UN says is needed over the next five years. Together, these diseases
kill about 16,000 people a day.
Half of the total is a US contribution of $30 billion, but the US was
already on course to provide this even before President Bush's announcement
last week. The proposal was greeted with great fanfare, yet a closer looks
shows it would in fact keep spending at about current levels for the next
five years, despite the emergency of drug resistant TB.
"A plan to really defeat AIDS, TB and malaria is still missing, yet
that's what we must keep demanding of these leaders," said Dr. Paul Zeitz,
Executive Director of the Global AIDS Alliance. "This is not an issue of
'more money is always needed when it comes to poverty.' Rather, the full
amount is needed so that we can actually get ahead of these health crises,
which pose a threat to everyone."
UN estimates show that $192 billion is needed to address AIDS, TB and
malaria during from 2008 to 2012, mostly for HIV/AIDS, plus even more is
needed to improve health systems.
"We will have to watch the G8 carefully to see they keep their
promises," Zeitz said. "But even if they do keep them, the funding falls
far short of what is needed. In addition, their promise to provide this
money 'over the coming years' is outrageously vague for something this
important."
The declaration reaffirms grant making by the Global Fund at a level of
$6 to 8 billion per year. However, each year for the past five years
President Bush has proposed a large cut in the US contribution, and the US
Congress is on course to provide only two-thirds of what the Fund needs
from the US in 2008.
There was a risk that the leaders would fail to recommit themselves to
the goal of universal access to HIV/AIDS services for 2010, including AIDS
treatment, but in the end they reaffirmed this goal. Still, the world is
not at present on course to provide full coverage by 2010.
The G8 acknowledged the need for reproductive and sexual health
services, as well as effective programs to end violence against women, as
essential parts of the response to AIDS.
"Peaceful protests, massive petitions and concerts again made a
difference by putting a spotlight on the imperative of the G8 keeping its
promises," said Zeitz. "Without the mobilization, we would not have made
the gains that we did."
Available Topic Expert(s): For information on the listed expert(s), click
appropriate link.
Dr. Paul S. Zeitz
http://profnet.prnewswire.com/Subscriber/ExpertProfile.aspx?ei=31640

SOURCE Global AIDS Alliance

The US, UN, Iran and 2008

2007-05-30T22:03:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

The following is certainly an oversimplified appraisal. But the order of the news reports lent itself to an almost automatic response. The events themselves may have played out somewhat differently. At least as far as timing is concerned. But nevertheless there chronological publishing times may be in proper order. The point is this.

We all know that Iran was on President Bush's 'D' list. They were not likely to get invited to any parties. And if you are old enough to remember the dagger in the heart of Jimmy Carter's Administration or had some history classes in school, you are familiar with 444 days worth of agony suffered by Americans at the hands of Iranian hospitality.

Then there was the Reagan Administration basking in the glory of the return of the American hostages and later the Iran-Contra scandal and I'm getting crazy just thinking about it. That is over twenty-five years ago and the process has not improved. It appears more complicated than the simple explanation that every country is looking out for their own agenda and benefit.

With the Memorial Day concluding earlier this week, thoughts of WWII and the greatest generation did not escape most Americans. Citizens of many other countries are sure to have been reminded also. When I think of our country's contribution to winning that war alongside so many other allied nations, another striking reminder enters my thoughts.

At the end of WWII the League of Nations was replaced by the United Nations whose stated mission was to intervene in conflicts between nations and avoid future wars. It almost seems as though human beings were finally getting it right. Instead of a period of time of peaceful activity followed by the totally impractical practice of armed conflict, we would solve our differences in an organized group to eliminate the need for death and destruction in enormous quantities.

Let's review the latest success of this noble endeavor. As stated earlier, the sequence of the following reports is assumed to be relatively chronological.

Iraq's Sadr blasts US-Iranian meeting
BAGHDAD, May 30 (UPI) -- Among those who blasted the meeting is Iranian-backed Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr, who said in a statement Wednesday that the U.S.-Iranian talks in Baghdad Monday constituted "interference in Iraqi affairs."

So the first thing that happens is the cleric known as Sadr throws his two cents worth in 'dissin' the meeting. One man who has done everything he can to cause more bloodshed in Iraq is complaining about a meeting between the US and Iran. Could be so simple as he doesn't want anything solved for it ups his value as a 'somebody' in Iraq.

Talking With Our Enemies Is Smart Policy
The Moderate Voice -
By Jeb Koogler. The recent meeting between American and Iranian officials in Baghdad effectively brings to an end the Bush administration’s use of ‘enforced ...

Then we have another opinion apparently applauding an approach that differs from the typical 'cowboy George' routine that one could characterize as shoot now, ask questions later or the old Teddy Roosevelt adage of walk softly and carry a big stick. This second philosophy has a tendency of provoking more attitude from hostile foes and delay the desired victory outcome.

Iran official rules out halting enrichment ahead of nuclear talks ...
International Herald Tribune, France -
In another sign of defiance, hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boasted that Iran has become so strong that no adversary can defeat it. ...

Which of course prompted the response above from the Iranians as well as another one bragging about no one would be crazy enough to challenge the great and powerful Iranian military. Ok, where did we here that Mother of all wars speech before. Yo, yo, Prez AJ, over powering the Iraqi forces was not a problem. Keeping the nutcases contained has presented a problem, but foreign armies, not a big deal. Does he have that little man syndrome?

Diplomats: West rejected Iran nuke concession
MSNBC -
In another sign of defiance, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad boasted that his country’s military has become so strong that no adversary would risk an ...

And the tennis ball lands in the other court and we have renewed talk about regime change. So the long delayed question is where the hell is the United Nations, again, and why does it even exist anymore. Not like their weren't plenty of reasons to ask for it to be dissolved before.

Getting Serious About Iran: For Regime Change
Commentary, NY -
To the contrary, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the recently elected president, announced that the Islamic Republic was reneging on its suspension agreement and ...

Afghanistan, Iraq, maybe Iran, Russia and new nukes, India talking more nukes, US shielding EU and the circus just keeps coming to town. Is no other country the least bit interested in taking one more shot at using the UN for what it was designed for? I am sure anyone reading this may feel compelled to complain about my suggestions. Consider that the UN is useless and it probably needs to be dissolved. But now would be a great time to give that 'body' one last chance to actually do something useful. There are major players involved in dealing with the current generation of conflict and resolution. There is no better time to get everyone involved and in a position to make the UN work before it is entirely abandoned. Even a loser is worth one more try. As long as the cards are on the table and every one knows how to play.

In the words of Larry the Cable Guy, 'get her done'. If it flops, get rid of it.

Thompson on the Run
Town Hall, DC -
At an event for the Electronic Data Systems Corp. on April 27, he said he supported helping Iranians overthrow President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s government. ...

Heading into the 2008 elections, it would be nice to resolve some of the world's issues since no one knows who will be in the White House and the example above is not ready for nonsense by his statements. That may apply to one or more other candidates but some would be a definite disadvantage in that regard.

UN Troops trading their guns for gold...

2007-05-25T09:49:00.001-07:00

What could be worse than UN troops illegally selling their guns? Why it would be UN troops illegally selling their guns to ruthless militias known for violating human rights. And to top it all off, the UN attempted to cover it up.

Via the UK Commentators we have this story from the BBC:

Pakistani UN peacekeeping troops have traded in gold and sold weapons to Congolese militia groups they were meant to disarm, the BBC has learnt. These militia groups were guilty of some of the worst human rights abuses during the Democratic Republic of Congo's long civil war. The trading went on in 2005. A UN investigative team sent to gather evidence was obstructed and threatened.

The team's report was buried by the UN itself to "avoid political fallout".

Richard Ndilu, in charge of immigration at Mongbwalu airstrip, became suspicious in late 2005 when an Indian businessman arrived there and went to stay at the camp of the Pakistani peacekeepers. Alerted to this illegal trade by her officials, the District Commissioner of Ituri, Petronille Vaweka, went to Bunia airport to intercept a plane from Mongbwalu. She said her way was blocked by Congolese army officers, who refused to allow her to inspect the cargo.

"I knew they had gold because the price of gold increased when the Indians went to Mongwalu," she said. "When we wanted to verify what was inside the plane the pilot refused to allow us to enter the plane - me who was the chief, he refused! It was a big scandal."

Yet another landmark on the path of utter failure for the UN. It doesn't reflect well upon a global organization purportedly devoted to world peace, not only when its troops engage in criminal activity, but when its upper echelons attempt to cover it up.

Scandal is increasingly the trademark of the UN.

The UN Let's the Insane Run the Asylum

2007-05-13T11:24:00.000-07:00

Imagine letting the nuts run the insane asylum, imagine letting the terminally lazy and stupid children run the school or imagine letting bank robbers manage the bank. That's what the Useless Nitwits are doing when they decided to let Zimbabwe head the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development.

Zimbabwe won approval last night to head a key United Nations body charged with promoting economic progress and environmental protection despite protests from the U.S., European nations and human rights organizations.

The approval was voted 26-21 with three abstentions by the 53-member U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development despite the fact that the government of President Robert Mugabe presides over one of the world's worst-performing economies.

Despite the fact that the thug Mugabe took the once prosperous country of Zimbabwe and turned into a welfare nation. Despite him turning a country that was the "breadbasket of Africa" and turning it into a empty burger box of Africa, the UN voted to have them head up the Commission on Sustainable Development.

Let's see Zimbabwe's numbers on Sustainable Development:

...the once-prosperous Zimbabwean economy has all but collapsed under Mr. Mugabe, who has been in power for more than a quarter-century.

Zimbabwe has the world's highest inflation rate at over 2,200 percent. Unemployment is estimated at between 80 and 90 percent, and severe food shortages are common in a country once considered southern Africa's breadbasket.

Just this week, Harare announced daily power cuts of up to 20 hours for households across the country, to give struggling farmers enough electricity to run irrigation systems.

Wow, those are some impressive credentials Mugabe has racked up there. Yep, his country is perfect to head up the Commission, if you live in the wacky world of UN that is.

Mr Minority

Illegal Immigrants Pander Thru UN

2007-05-06T17:49:00.000-07:00

By Stanford Matthews
originally posted at:
Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Another initiative by the United Nations cloaked in veils of morality and their human rights version of public relations. Nothing like allowing the special interest of not only the United States but foreign countries as well to hide behind the UN to stiff American citizens. Lobbyists don't only work Washington, they are alive and well at the UN.

This misadventure by the UN should be of concern to all American citizens of the legal variety. For now, gone are the days when simply using the word American implied one was a legal citizen of the United States. Thanks to the United States representatives to the UN who have publicly pushed for human rights initiatives in other countries, the shoe will go on the other foot. Under normal circumstances that would be understandable. But when is the last time you remember any country successfully solving human rights violations after intervention by the UN? So while the others skate on their responsibilities, America will be subjected to who knows what by the political dance from others at the UN.

It is claimed there is a center in Texas that houses illegal immigrant detainees that has been 'highly criticized'. If you had to guess the source of the complaints, do you suppose it may be someone opposed to immigration control? It is reported vaguely in the AP report that it was 'a federal district judge'. But it would appear by the same report that the ACLU or similar group and other immigration advocates initiated what is an unsubstantiated claim based on this same AP report. So what, the ACLU and some other no borders advocates whined to a federal judge?

There is at least one other location in Texas that is the subject of this UN visit. The visitor from the UN is being described as an independent expert on migrant rights. Interesting that part of the complaint concerns a suggestion that the place of detention for illegal immigrants is 'like a prison'. Imagine that, a prison to house illegal immigrants prior to deportation from violating federal law in the United States. The expert on migrant rights is Jorge Bustamante. Based on the AP report and other research, Mr. Bustamante is a professor from Mexico and holds or held positions at Notre Dame as well as other institutions. He also is on some of the economic councils at the UN and advocates dual citizenship for immigrants as referenced below from 1998.

Report of the UN working group on the rights of migrants
Mr. Jorge A. Bustamante (Mexico) continued to act as Chairman-Rapporteur. ... Denial of dual citizenship, creating social and legal problems for migrants ...
www.smc.org.ph/rights/experts.htm

He has already visited LA and will go to more cities and report his findings to the 47 country UN Human Rights Council.

Human rights expert examines migrant issues in L.A.
The U.N.'s Jorge Bustamante spends two days seeking information on the treatment of migrants.
By Teresa Watanabe, Times Staff Writer
May 4, 2007
In the first broad international scrutiny of U.S. treatment of migrants, a United Nations human rights expert took testimony about worker abuse, government raids, family separations and other issues as he wrapped up a two-day visit to Los Angeles on Thursday.

Bustamante, a University of Notre Dame sociology professor who splits his time between his native Mexico and the United States, said that anti-immigrant sentiment is rising around the world as unprecedented levels of global migration have prompted a growing number of nations to adopt restrictive laws.

Here is some additional information about the man who will do his best for the plight of the illegal immigrant and all the business and political interests that desire his obviously objective analysis of the situation. But it seems the only item that is ignored in analyzing the situation is the very first one. Illegal immigrants are described as such for their choice to violate federal law of a sovereign nation by entering the country through any means necessary other than those prescribed by law. Mr Bustamante will discuss these matters with the US government, immigration advocates and illegal immigrants. Sound fair to me. No bias will ever develop through this contrived investigation.

http://www.nd.edu/~latino/academics/facultybios-html/bustamante_print.html

The Institute for Latino Studies

University of Notre Dame
230 McKenna Hall
Notre Dame, IN 46556-0764
Tel: (574) 631-4440
Fax: (574) 631-3522
E-mail: latino@nd.edu
URL: www.nd.edu/~latino

Jorge Bustamante
Titles: Eugene Conley Professor of Sociology
Office: 214 Hesburgh
Phone: (574) 631-4454
Fax: (574) 631-2401
E-mail: bustamante.1@nd.edu

Education
BA and PhD, University of Notre Dame

Research Interests

International Migration, Mexican American Studies, and the
Sociology of Development

Current Courses
International Migration and Human Rights

Publications

With more than 200 publications in scholarly journals of the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Venezuela, Spain, and Mexico, mostly dealing with Mexican immigration to the United States and the US-Mexico border phenomenon, Jorge Bustamante has been hailed as a leading expert in the field of international migration. Bustamante has also been writing a weekly column in the editorial pages of Mílenio Diario of Mexico City since September of 2000 and Frontera of Tijuana since November of 1999.

Teaching Experience

Bustamante has been a faculty member at the University of Texas at Austin; at El Colegio de México in Mexico City; and, presently, at the University of Notre Dame, where he has held an endowed chair (the Eugene Conley Professor of Sociology) since 1986. As a visiting professor he has been in charge of seminars and graduate courses at the University of California, Riverside; the National University of Mexico; and the Institute of Political Sciences of Paris.

Appointments

In 1994 Bustamante accepted appointments to the Joint Public Advisory Committee (J-PAC) as well as the Border Environmental Cooperation Commission (BECC), which were created by the governments of Mexico, the United States, and Canada as a result of the "parallel agreements" of NAFTA. Following Mexico's admission to the OECD, Bustamante was appointed to be SOPEMI’s (Continuous Reporting System on Migration) correspondent for Mexico. He continues serving as coordinator of the Social Sciences Committee of the Council of Advisors on Science and Technology for the President of Mexico. In 1995 the government of Japan appointed him Honorary Consul in Baja California, Mexico.

In 1995 Bustamante was a member of a binational group of researchers, appointed by the governments of Mexico and the United States, to conduct research on Mexican migration to the United States. Then, in 1997, the member countries of Latin America and the Caribbean voted in favor of Mexico’s proposal to appoint Bustamante as part of a new 5-member committee to study the worldwide relationship between international migrations and human rights. In November of 1997, during the committee’s first working session in Geneva, Switzerland, Bustamante was elected President, and he was reelected one year later. He founded El Colegio de la Frontera Norte (COLEF), the prominent Mexican institute for the study of border issues located in Tijuana, Mexico, from its creation in 1982 until January of 1998. In July of this same year, the Bank of Bilbao Vizcaya Foundation granted him its annual fellowship, one of the most prestigious in Spain. Awarded to several Nobel prizewinners in the past, this is the first time this fellowship has been granted to a social scientist. Bustamante's most recent appointment was on 12 May 2000 to UAM’s (Metropolitan Autonomus University of Mexico City) Junta Directiva, a collective body that serves as the highest authority of the three academically self-governing universities that comprise the UAM.

Honors

In 1988 his overwhelming body of research was cited by Mexican President Madrid when he gave Bustamante the Premio Nacional de Ciencias, the highest award granted to scientists by the Mexican government. Also, President Carlos Salinas de Gortari presented Bustamante with the National Award on Demography for his research on Mexican migration to the United States. On 18 January 2001 Dr. Bustamante was appointed a member of an advisory group on immigration and population policies by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mexico.

US and UN: What's the Point?

2007-04-25T07:05:00.000-07:00

Why anyone would enlist the assistance of the UN for any purpose is puzzling. But considering UN involvement in the Iraq war is totally absurd. Even in the Clinton Administration the UN bailed on Iraq as indicated below.

BBC News: UN withdraws staff from Iraq
As speculation grows over US military action against Iraq, virtually all UN personnel are leaving the country.

And again the UN bailed on Iraq in the Bush Administration:

Bush Gives Saddam 48 Hours: UN Withdraws from Iraq
NEW YORK, New York, March 17, 2003 (ENS) - Saying it does not mean an end of involvement of the United Nations in the Iraqi situation, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan announced today that he will withdraw UN staff from Iraq following the failure of efforts to achieve united action in the Security Council in removing weapons of mass destruction from the country.

So again, what's the point of involving the UN on matters related to the Iraq war? They offered no support leading up to the war and stood idly by while other UN members adhered to their own selfish interests rather than apply real pressure on Saddam to comply with inspections. Many blamed President Bush for ignoring the UN and forcing a unilateral decision to confront Saddam with military action. The same UN that did nothing in the previous 12 years continued their do nothing policies, protecting financial and political interests, then blamed President Bush for going it alone. Beyond a few reliable partners like Britain and Poland, most coalition partners fled when confronted.

After the departure of John Bolton we have Zalmay Khalilzad recently appointed to attend to business at the UN for the United States. The following report gives the appearance of pleading and raises some questions.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007 at 18:54
Subject: /UN-Diplomacy/US/

New US envoy Khalilzad seeks greater UN role in Iraq

New York (dpa) - Drawing on his recent experience in Iraq, newly appointed US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said Tuesday that governments should work with the United Nations to bring about "positive results" in the war-torn nation.

On his second day of work as the White House's envoy to the UN, Khalilzad sounded diplomatic and conciliatory in coaxing the UN to do more, particularly in Iraq, while pledging US cooperation.

"I have seen first hand that working with others, with the UN, that positive results can be achieved," Khalilzad told reporters. "With that perspective, I will engage, I will work hard, will listen and will be respectful, but will also speak for what we believe."

Here is a brief summary of his resume':
Zalmay Khalilzad:
1984 - US Dept of State, Council on Foreign Relations, worked for Paul Wolfowitz
1985 - Senior State Dept official during Reagan Administration (Senior after one year?)
1990 - Defense Department as Deputy Undersecretary for Policy Planning. (Bush 41)
1993 - Director of the Strategy, Doctrine, and Force Structure at the RAND Corporation
2001 - All over the Bush Administration

If Khalilzad is so entrenched in GOP, or more accurately, Reagan/Bush politics, why is the current President Bush placing him in this position with the UN? It is not like the current President Bush has not made a mistake or two in the Iraq War and this may simply be just one more piece of bad advice he has accepted. But regardless of the intent, on the surface it would appear there are only two reasons for this appointment. The simplest explanation would be a pure political move to give the appearance of 'making nice' at the UN as if to say we're doing all we can to achieve success in Iraq. Or the more troubling possibility that President George W. Bush has conceded defeat and is preparing for withdrawal from Iraq before the end of his term. Of course there is always the possibility that President Bush is more intelligent than most give him credit for and has a newly formed and sophisticated strategy for successfully completing the mission in Iraq of which this is one part. That might be overly optimistic.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

More 'Expressions' from the UN

2007-04-18T08:13:00.000-07:00

Apr 18, 3:26 AM EDT
U.N.Council Authorizes Lebanese Mission
By EDITH M. LEDERER
UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- The U.N. Security Council
expressed "serious concern" at mounting reports of weapons being
smuggled from Syria to Lebanon and authorized an independent mission to
evaluate monitoring of the border between the two countries.
The council adopted a presidential statement late Tuesday reiterating its
demand that Syria tighten its border and urging all countries,
"especially in the region," to enforce the arms ban on the Islamic
militant group Hezbollah.

In light of US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi's
controversial trip to the Middle East, including the political sore
spot of visiting Syria, the UN seems convinced that Syria is moving
weapons to Lebanon. This is the same country responsible for the
assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. While Pelosi
still can't figure out what was wrong with going to Syria, the UN is
equally inept in responding to Middle East events. This is simply the
most recent update on why the UN serves no purpose but to allow
international crime to proceed unchecked.

So far their toothless resolution prohibiting Syrian and Iranian guerillas
from moving weapons has had no effect. The council asked politicians in
Lebanon to use 'dialogue' to prevent these problems. And their idea of
stepping up the pressure is for the Secretary General to visit Assad and
others in person. Sure, that will help. Why do they even bother with
these theatrics? After all this time and all the failed attempts to act like
united nations, who do they think they are fooling?

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

U.N. chief eyes climate change summit

2007-04-10T20:53:00.000-07:00

From Breitbart/Reuters:

The United Nations is contemplating a high-level meeting on climate change this year, which could lead to a world summit by 2009, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the Financial Times.

The high-level meeting, which could involve ministers and other top delegates, was the most "practical and realistic approach", Ban said in an interview published on Wednesday.

Such a meeting -- on the margins of the U.N. General Assembly in New York in September -- "may be able to give some clear guidelines to the December Bali meeting", he said.

Ban was referring to a United Nations conference on climate change to be held on the Indonesian resort island.

If September's high-level meeting was a success "a summit level meeting will have to be discussed later on", Ban told the newspaper. "It may be 2008 or 2009."

The FT reported there had been calls for a summit level meeting on climate change at the United Nations in September.

But Ban said: "One difficulty is whether I can see for sure the participation of all the major countries, including the United States".

The U.N. chief said after attending the annual summit of the Group of Eight (G8) industrialized nations in June "I may be in a clearer position to propose a certain initiative".

Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat in Bonn, told Reuters last month that Ban had agreed at talks in New York to send envoys to probe government willingness for a high-level meeting about global warming.

Let's see now.... we currently have a global war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan, an active genocide in Darfur; conflict brewing between Israeli's and the Palestinians and a United Nations Human Rights council that is unable to identify a single violation of human rights unless, of course, its connected to Israel.

With all of that, the Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon believes that it's worth the United Nations time to focus on Global Warming. The theory is STILL in dispute as discussed in this Newsweek article of April 15, 2007. Here is what an MIT Meteorologist has to say about Global Warming:

Judging from the media in recent months, the debate over global warming is now over. There has been a net warming of the earth over the last century and a half, and our greenhouse gas emissions are contributing at some level. Both of these statements are almost certainly true. What of it? Recently many people have said that the earth is facing a crisis requiring urgent action. This statement has nothing to do with science. There is no compelling evidence that the warming trend we've seen will amount to anything close to catastrophe. What most commentators—and many scientists—seem to miss is that the only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes. The earth is always warming or cooling by as much as a few tenths of a degree a year; periods of constant average temperatures are rare. Looking back on the earth's climate history, it's apparent that there's no such thing as an optimal temperature—a climate at which everything is just right.

... and yet world governments and now the United Nations want to hold summits to discuss possible actions to thwart a catastrophe that doesn't exist.

Richard S. Lindzen (Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) comments from the same Newsweek article :

Moreover, actions taken thus far to reduce emissions have already had negative consequences without improving our ability to adapt to climate change.

[...]The alleged solutions have more potential for catastrophe than the putative problem. The conclusion of the late climate scientist Roger Revelle—Al Gore's supposed mentor—is worth pondering: the evidence for global warming thus far doesn't warrant any action unless it is justifiable on grounds that have nothing to do with climate.

If a Meteorologist from MIT thinks its ill-advised to move forward at this time why in the world would government officials and a bunch of UN diplomats think they know more than him and charge ahead anyway?

I think the United Nations time would be better spent cleaning up its internal corruption and dismantling that joke of a human rights council than to waste its time on unproven and untested theory that flies in face of facts.

crossposted at Conservative Thoughts

Quote of the week

2007-04-09T16:56:00.000-07:00

"[T]he UN Security Council resolution 1747 against the Islamic Republic of Iran have had no effect."

New York Quotes Spank the U.N.

2007-04-04T14:59:00.000-07:00

It is not only the general public who has grown weary of the empty
promise of the United Nations. At least some of those who
represent the public in government express their resentment also.

In the state of New York and the city which has the UN headquarters not
all public officials are enamored. If only members of the UN were
as anxious to prove themselves worthy of it's name as they are to
expand their useless kingdom again this year as in 2005.

The officials say they oppose any plan to help the United Nations,
which they describe as an antidemocratic, anti-American, and
anti-Israeli organization.

An assemblyman from Brooklyn put it this way.

"I don't know of anyone who feels differently from a year ago or
two years ago," he said. "As far as I am concerned, anything with the
United Nations turns my stomach."

A New York council member echoed sentiments of his constituents on
using park land to build a UN office tower,

"protecting the parkland that we have in an area that is starved
for it is very important," he said. "Nobody will tolerate simply losing a
park."

A council member who counts himself among those opposed to the presence
of the United Nations in New York, Simcha Felder, said it would be a
mistake for the city to help it in any way.

Whether the extravagance of an exclusive club or the politics of money
eventually win out, it is clear many in the city that is home to the UN
headquarters are not interested in the UN or any economic impact on the
city.

source:

Lawmakers Vowing To Block United Nations Building Effort
BY GRACE RAUH - Staff Reporter of the Sun
April 3, 2007
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/51720

One of the UN's latest initiatives has been provided more
funding. This 'project' is for so-called missions in two regions
at the cost of more than half a billion dollars. You may like to
read this press release to note the scary similarities between UN
councils and votes and the US Congress. Lots of yeas, nays,
abstentions and absences which read like a playbook on how to spend a
lot of money accomplishing nothing. There is nothing united about it.

GENERAL ASSEMBLY APPROVES FINANCING FOR UNITED NATIONS MISSIONS IN LEBANON, TIMOR-LESTE
The Secretary-General received commitment authority from the Assembly
following the expansion of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon
(UNIFIL) and establishment of the follow-up United Nations Integrated
Mission in Timor-Leste (UNMIT) by the Security Council last year. After
the Fifth Committee considered those missions� full budgets during its
first resumed session, the Assembly appropriated some $403.1 million
for UNIFIL and $184.82 million for UNMIT today.

You may like to know a bit about UN peacekeeping missions and whether
or not they would have much effect. At the honorable Nobel
organization they offer a brief history on UN peacekeeping. It
would be comforting to know that all nations would contribute
collectively to an organization focused on peaceful solutions to armed
conflict. But the UN drops the ball on this too, right from the beginning.

according to the Nobel organization:

The United Nations Peacekeeping Forces are employed by the World
Organizaton to maintain or re-establish peace in an area of armed
conflict.

The UN Peacekeeping Forces may only be employed when both parties to a
conflict accept their presence.

The Peacekeeping Forces are subordinate to the leadership of the United
Nations.

Operational control belongs to the Secretary-General and his
secretariat.

We distinguish between two kinds of peacekeeping operations - unarmed
observer groups and lightly-armed military forces. The latter are only
allowed to employ their weapons for self-defence. Altogether, 14 UN
operations have been carried out.

Just some more examples of how meaningless the United Nations is or has
become. The largest mistake those in the Congress made lately was
to turn down John Bolton's nomination as permanent ambassador to the
UN. In the time he had, some progress was made by informing the
UN business as usual would be taking a new course. However,
members of Congress would rather have the useless organization continue
its corruption well into this century.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The UN - Biased against Israel and free speech.

2007-03-31T02:03:00.000-07:00

Hello there, this is my first post at this site and have been waiting for something worthy of posting on here. I came across this at UN Watch a site I recomend that everyone has a look at as it shows how badly the UN is run.

The UN founded from the worthless League of Nations had noble ideals and fine principles at that time, now read this and weep for the sake of our planet:

Links:UN Watch

Delivered by Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch

Mr. President,

Six decades ago, in the aftermath of the Nazi horrors, Eleanor Roosevelt, Réné Cassin and other eminent figures gathered here, on the banks of Lake Geneva, to reaffirm the principle of human dignity. They created the Commission on Human Rights. Today, we ask: What has become of their noble dream?

In this session we see the answer. Faced with compelling reports from around the world of torture, persecution, and violence against women, what has the Council pronounced, and what has it decided? Nothing. Its response has been silence. Its response has been indifference. Its response has been criminal. One might say, in Harry Truman’s words, that this has become a Do-Nothing, Good-for-Nothing Council.

But that would be inaccurate. This Council has, after all, done something. It has enacted one resolution after another condemning one single state: Israel. In eight pronouncements—and there will be three more this session—Hamas and Hezbollah have been granted impunity. The entire rest of the world—millions upon millions of victims, in 191 countries—continue to go ignored.
So yes, this Council is doing something. And the Middle East dictators who orchestrate this campaign will tell you it is a very good thing. That they seek to protect human rights, Palestinian rights. So too, the racist murderers and rapists of Darfur women tell us they care about the rights of Palestinian women; the occupiers of Tibet care about the occupied; and the butchers of Muslims in Chechnya care about Muslims. But do these self-proclaimed defenders truly care about Palestinian rights?

Let us consider the past few months. More than 130 Palestinians were killed by Palestinian forces. This is three times the combined total that were the pretext for calling special sessions in July and November. Yet the champions of Palestinian rights—Ahmadinejad, Assad, Khaddafi, John Dugard—they say nothing. Little 3-year-old boy Salam Balousha and his two brothers were murdered in their car by Prime Minister Haniyeh’s troops. Why has this Council chosen silence?
Because Israel could not be blamed. Because, in truth, the dictators who run this Council couldn’t care less about Palestinians, or about any human rights. They seek to demonize Israeli democracy, to delegitimize the Jewish state, to scapegoat the Jewish people. They also seek something else: to distort and pervert the very language and idea of human rights. You ask: What has become of the founders’ dream? With terrible lies, it is being turned into a nightmare. Thank you, Mr. President.

Now read the reply from the Council president, Luis Alfonso de Alba:

For the first time in this session I will not express thanks for that statement. I shall point out to the distinguished representative of the organization that just spoke, the distinguished representative of United Nations Watch, if you’d kindly listen to me. I am sorry that I’m not in a position to thank you for your statement. I should mention that I will not tolerate any similar statements in the Council. The way in which members of this Council were referred to, and indeed the way in which the council itself was referred to, all of this is inadmissible. In the memory of the persons that you referred to, founders of the Human Rights Commission, and for the good of human rights, I would urge you in any future statements to observe some minimum proper conduct and language. Otherwise, any statement you make in similar tones to those used today will be taken out of the records.

Free speech gagged.
Tags: United Nations
Hillel Neuer
UN Watch
Commission on Human Rights
Luis Alfonso de Alba
Israel

The U.N. Is No More Than a PR Firm

2007-03-27T15:10:00.000-07:00

If you have ever wondered about what it is that the United Nations does you are not alone. There are plenty of reasons to be, at the very least, disenchanted with this organizations performance. Rather than review their charter, history or reason for being, it may be helpful to let their own news items describe some typical operating characteristics.

Commonly used headline phrases can tell you much about the United Nations. A casual glance at some recent headlines from the UN exposes the main theme of the organization. Do not annoy or anger anyone while you try to find words to express some sort of concern as if any of your members really cared. Here's a great phrase for an example; 'call for universal support.' What is the point, other than public relations and a pathetic attempt to convince anyone foolish enough to believe the UN is anything more than a political smoke screen? Rather than call for universal support, why not prove your worth and have all members discipline offending nations? Can't do that.

'Civil institutions can help' is another UN headline phrase. The UN announces these institutions are the best hope in reducing the disappearances of people all over the world. That is because the UN is helpless to do anything about crimes against citizens anywhere in the world. Representatives of nearly every country on the planet are at the UN. If they are not members, those who are can, if they wanted to, apply international pressure to rein in countries displaying bad behavior. The kind of bad behavior that virtually no one would describe as anything other than criminal. Governments who are responsible for the disappearance of individuals employ that tactic for one reason. The government disapproves of these individuals and has the power to make them disappear. It is not magic, it is simply criminal. And the UN admits they are not able to successfully intervene.

How about an entire UN News headline to examine? 'Human rights problems in Liberia require national, international response.' Well no kidding. Imagine that, the UN produced a report to enlighten the world on the need for intervention where violence toward women and children is not being resolved. At least 3 security council temporary members are from Africa. And all the UN can do is issue a report to tell people what they already know. And still they do nothing. If you think this is unfair, have someone from the UN challenge these statements.

'Citing flawed process' a claimed UN expert suggests the tribunal that ultimately hanged the former Vice President of Iraq had 'violated international standards of due process' in this matter. It is not hard to believe that this man would have died one way or another with a new sheriff in town. And you will notice his appeal was ignored with little or no attention paid. Personally, it does not bother me that the man was executed. But for those who may have, the UN again was impotent. They don't make enough Viagara to cure that for the UN.

I'll play UN here for a moment. If you believe the case presented by Colin Powell at the UN for beginning military operations of coalition forces in Iraq was flawed you make a compelling point. If you believe that the case presented was only verified after the fact and as such is a moot point because Iraq needed military intervention anyhow, you also make a compelling point. Therefore, as the UN we will allow you to vote accordingly and nothing else matters. Funny how the countries voting against the resolution for the United States to intervene in Iraq had their own reasons like money Iraq owed them or business they were conducting that would be interrupted as the premise for their votes. Funny too, that when North Korea poses a big enough nuisance, the all get together and work a deal that does not penalize North Korea for bad behavior. And the current sanctions against Iran were calculated for the expected response from a crazed dictator. You make the call. Is this wrong?

There is really no need to cite more headlines. If you cannot see by this brief examination that the UN is nothing more than a PR firm sponsored by most of the world's governments, you will need more convincing than this writer is willing to provide today. If it at least makes you curious that should be enough to encourage you to take it upon yourself to get informed. Reading posts at this site as well as others plus the near unlimited resources available for such study, you should be able to get up to speed and express your opinions with your government. It falls under the category of civic responsibility. Something of a foreign concept to those at the United Nations.

And I almost forgot, we haven't even touched on all the corruption involved.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

( source: UN News Centre )

2007-03-26T20:25:00.000-07:00

crossposted at Conservative Thoughts

From UNWatch.org:

Human Rights Nightmare

Speech before UN Human Rights Council 4th Session
23 March 2007

Delivered by Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch

Transcript of Speech:

Mr. President,
Six decades ago, in the aftermath of the Nazi horrors, Eleanor Roosevelt, Réné Cassin and other eminent figures gathered here, on the banks of Lake Geneva, to reaffirm the principle of human dignity. They created the Commission on Human Rights. Today, we ask: What has become of their noble dream?

In this session we see the answer. Faced with compelling reports from around the world of torture, persecution, and violence against women, what has the Council pronounced, and what has it decided?
Nothing. Its response has been silence. Its response has been indifference. Its response has been criminal.
One might say, in Harry Truman’s words, that this has become a Do-Nothing, Good-for-Nothing Council.

But that would be inaccurate. This Council has, after all, done something.
It has enacted one resolution after another condemning one single state: Israel. In eight pronouncements—and there will be three more this session—Hamas and Hezbollah have been granted impunity. The entire rest of the world—millions upon millions of victims, in 191 countries—continue to go ignored.

So yes, this Council is doing something. And the Middle East dictators who orchestrate this campaign will tell you it is a very good thing. That they seek to protect human rights, Palestinian rights.
So too, the racist murderers and rapists of Darfur women tell us they care about the rights of Palestinian women; the occupiers of Tibet care about the occupied; and the butchers of Muslims in Chechnya care about Muslims.
But do these self-proclaimed defenders truly care about Palestinian rights?
Let us consider the past few months. More than 130 Palestinians were killed by Palestinian forces. This is three times the combined total that were the pretext for calling special sessions in July and November. Yet the champions of Palestinian rights—Ahmadinejad, Assad, Khaddafi, John Dugard—they say nothing. Little 3-year-old boy Salam Balousha and his two brothers were murdered in their car by Prime Minister Haniyeh’s troops. Why has this Council chosen silence?
Because Israel could not be blamed. Because, in truth, the dictators who run this Council couldn’t care less about Palestinians, or about any human rights.
They seek to demonize Israeli democracy, to delegitimize the Jewish state, to scapegoat the Jewish people. They also seek something else: to distort and pervert the very language and idea of human rights.
You ask: What has become of the founders’ dream? With terrible lies, it is being turned into a nightmare.
Thank you, Mr. President.

This is one of the best and most straightforward descriptions of what the UN Human rights council has become. Israel has been declared the number one enemy of the United Nations and Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, held up the truth for everyone too plainly see. The United Nations Human Rights council was less than amused with his speech.

Here is the transcript of response by UN Human Rights Council President LUIS ALFONSO DE ALBA:

For the first time in this session I will not express thanks for that statement. I shall point out to the distinguished representative of the organization that just spoke, the distinguished representative of United Nations Watch, if you'd kindly listen to me. I am sorry that I'm not in a position to thank you for your statement. I should mention that I will not tolerate any similar statements in the Council. The way in which members of this Council were referred to, and indeed the way in which the council itself was referred to, all of this is inadmissible. In the memory of the persons that you referred to, founders of the Human Rights Commission, and for the good of human rights, I would urge you in any future statements to observe some minimum proper conduct and language. Otherwise, any statement you make in similar tones to those used today will be taken out of the records.

Not only did President Alba refuse to thank Mr. Neuer for his statements; but then threatened to remove any more truthful statements about the treatment of Israel by the UN Human rights council from the record.

Sad, Mr. Neuer held up a mirror to the UN Human Rights council and they refused to look in. This council is a useless organization and it proved that it intends to remain that way.

Women’s Rights at the UN

2007-03-21T19:08:00.000-07:00

Crossposted at Conservative Thoughts.

From Eye on the UN

Last Friday, March 9, 2007 the UN wrapped up its annual session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women. Guess where they found a violation of women's rights? Among the hundreds of thousands of women who are dead, dying, mutilated, displaced or raped in Sudan? Among the million female migrant workers cowering in the basements of Saudi Arabian villas from the taskmasters who stole their passports the minute they got off the plane? Among the women stoned and hanged for "adultery" in Iran? The millions of women forcibly aborted in China? The thousands murdered or forced to commit suicide for the crime of "dishonoring" their fathers and brothers across the Arab and Muslim world?If you guessed "none of the above," then you'll enjoy coming on down to the UN. The UN's lead body charged with promoting and protecting women's rights identifies only one state as violating the rights of women in the world today – Israel.(Violating the rights of Palestinian women.) The vote was 40 for and 2 against (the United States and Canada).

Germany, on behalf of the European Union, gave a one minute "explanation" excusing its affirmative vote. It said: "we express our deep concerns for the impact on all women in the region including the Israeli women" – although Germany did not insist such language be inserted in the resolution itself. For 60 seconds, the representative of the country where millions of Jewish women and girls were murdered en masse not so long ago took notice of the Jewish mothers and daughters who have fallen victim to terrorism in the Jewish state. This is the moral corruption that the UN breeds within democracies like Germany. In the United Nations, an institution owned and directed by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the European Union grovels while the real abusers cheer.

Why are we wasting our time and money on this USELESS organization? Israel is a DEMOCRACY; they have the rule of law, they do not have the 'fashion police' running around ensuring that women are dressed according to government regulation or the state religion. Women can vote, be employed at all levels of business and run for office. Israeli women are allowed to drive a car and even go to the grocery store WITHOUT a male escort.

What despicable acts has Israel committed against women that surpasses Iran and Saudi Arabia?

The horrible crime is erecting a security wall for their country to keep out Hamas militants and suicide bombers; this is the cause of all Palestinian women's woes. The religion of peace which forces them into virtual servitude, honor killings, forced marriages and rape all of these problems will simply evaporate once that wall is removed. Ridiculous.

The vote was 40-2 here is the breakdown:

Favor: Algeria, Armenia, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, China, Congo, Croatia, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Germany, Ghana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, Nigeria, Peru, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Suriname, Thailand, Togo, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania.

Against: Canada, United States

Absent: Cameroon, Lesotho, Zambia

Thank you Canada!! I would like to know what the United Kingdom was thinking when it cast its vote. What's next for the U.N. ending the 'hunger crisis' in London?

Screw the UN

Simon Deng - The United Nations: Accessory to Slavery and other Crimes

Simon Deng tells it like it is.

Phyllis Chesler: America - The Chief Subsidizer of UN Rapists and Traffickers

Well, of course...

Who is more corrupt - the Nobel Committee or the UN?

More here:

This is 2011! Why do we still have pirates?

Ms Clinton and the UN Gun Stealers

Kosovo PM Linked to Sale of Human Organs

The racism of Obama's Administration: Sherrod

The ICJ Ruling and the Quisling Regime in Serbia

UN supports pedophiles?

UN Rights of the Child TREATY must be stopped

International Response to North Korean Missile Launch

UN's Attack on the Industrialized Nations

UN SecGen Ban calls US "deadbeat"

Obama, Race and Durban II

Obama, Clinton Send Political Clone to the UN

I hate the UN: $23 million mural paid for in part with foreign aid funds.

A Vow from the United Nations

UN Threatens Religious Freedom and National Sovereignty

UN's zero-tolerance policy on child molestation a sham

The Balkan Crisis All Over Again?

John Bolton's Surrender is not an Option

Another Threat to Sovereignty

Christmas and the Troops

Get rich quick, join the Bluehelmets.

UN Trademarks: Failing and Fundraising

How UNRWA Creates Dependency

As a people, the Palestinians are addicted to their equivalent of Crack Cocaine--It's not a chemical dependency it is a financial dependency. The drug is called the United Nations Relief and Works Agency or UNRWA.

The UNRWA is one of those self-perpetuating bureaucracies that you hear conservative politicians rail against. And like all self-perpetuating bureaucracies, their mission is to maintain the status quo--but in this case maintaining the status quo means preventing peace.

December 3, 2007

UN Money Game Includes Global Warming

2008 Interational Year of the Potato.

Corrupt, bigoted former head of UNMIK, Bernard Kouchner, is back in the news...

A vitriolic jihadist who works for UNICEF? So much for the UN!

But we remember Bernard Kouchner from Kosovo!

Clearly, Kouchner has sided with the Islamists all along!

So why did Nicholas Sarkozy appoint Kouchner as foreign minister?

Recommended Reading for 11/17/07

No appeasement!

UN Spins Economics of Africa

Link: UN sub Human Rights Council to Adopt Barbarian Agenda

The UN Production of the Flim Flam Man

Have the UNMIK abuses turned the Serbs against America and Western Europe?

You probably won't know the answer to this question:

Are Serbs, and Serbian-Americans, on your side?

But wait, there's more!

Dissecting the UN Debacle in Kosovo

This four-part series on the Kosovo UN debacle is worth reading word for word!

From Kultur&Nöge (Sweden):

Still not sure what's going on in Kosovo? Then read this:

But wait, there's more:

The fish rots from the head...

And al-Goracle? What does he have to do with it?

United Nations Was Never the Point

Another United Nations Failure Report

Shocker: UN Tsunami Corruption

Press clips and blogs everywhere reveal UN ineffectiveness, incompetence, and corruption

Just a small part of the sorry record:

For a little comic relief:

Interview with John Bolton at RWN

Russian UN diplomat gets 4 years for bribery.

Down with the Law of the Sea Treaty!

From the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) Teleconference:

Why does LOST present such a threat to United States sovereignty?

The International Community Needs a Conscience

Did Iran Blink?

Toothless UN Wastes 3 Days in Burma

Burma or Myanmar: That's not the question

A-mad-jihadist's speech to the UN

The UN, GW and Abandoning Scrutiny

Were Nations Ever United?

Ahmadinejad protest at UN Headquarters, NYC

The UN and China's Military Budget

Is Zimbabwe an Example of UN Success?

UN and WMD

UN MDG: Millennium Development Grifters

Iran -UN World Conference against Racism.